Kary
Mullis, winner of the 1993 Nobel Prize in chemistry, has
rocked the world of science with his party-boy surfer demeanor.
Now he's ready to take on the AIDS establishment. Celia
Farber talks to the rebel genius.
The first time I interviewed
Kary Mullis was in 1991, in the bar of a hotel somewhere
in New Jersey while a blizzard raged outside. His demeanor
suprised me. Here was a man responsible for one of the greatest
scientific inventions of the century - the mass duplication
of DNA - and he swaggered in wearing jeans, cracking jokes
in a sharp southern accent, ordering drinks, and behaving
overall like a regular person. He utterly lacked that sterile,
statesmanlike aura that usually looms over Men of Science.
Instead, Mullis, who has been
described in the press as possessing a "creative nonconformity
that verges on the lunatic," struck me as a person with
a pure and insatiable curiosity. He had as many questions
for me as I had for him. For instance, by the end of the
interview, I recall him asking me to articulate why it would
matter if I were to discover that the hotel lobby, the bar,
the bartender, the drinks, and our conversation had all
been an electronic mirage.
Mullis's invention of the polymerase
chain reaction (PCR) won him the Nobel Prize in chemistry
in 1993. PCR is a remarkably simply yet revolutionary method
of selectively multiplying and mass-producing specific DNA
segments in just hours. Previously, DNA could be multiplied,
but not isolated, and it is in the isolation that the revolutionary
kernel lies. Scientists can now undertake everything from
detecting hereditary cancers in foetuses, to solving impossible
murder mysteries, to retracing the very depts of evolution.
The London Observer trumpeted: "Not since James Watt walked
across Glasgow Green in 1765 and realized that the secondary
steam condenser would transform steam power, an inspiration
that set loose the industrial revolution, has a single,
momentous idea been so well recorded in time and place."
Now there can be precise biological
vision where there used to be darkness. Speculation can
crystalize into fact, and lives are already being changed
by the PCR machine, now a staple of every biology laboratory.
An American soldier killed in Vietnam, for instance, was
identified after more than a generation by matching the
DNA in a lock of his baby hair to a single bone found on
the battlefield. A man who had served nine years in prison
for rape and murder he did not commit was released thanks
to a PCR test on a dried speck of semen taken from the crime
scene. President Lincoln's suspected genetic disease, Marfan's
syndrome, can finally be diagnosed based on his store bone
fragments. The FBI expects that PCR will one day make it
possible to identify extortionists by the DNA from their
salvia left on the flap of an envelope, and even ancient
DNA from dinosaurs can be resurrected and studied. In fact,
PCR was the conceptual root of Michael Crichton's blockbuster
novel Jurassic Park.
PCR has also had a great impact
on the field of AIDS, or rather, HIV research. PCR can,
among other things, detect HIV in people who test negative
to the HIV antibody test.
The word "eccentric" seems to
come up often in connection with Mullis name: His first
published scientific paper, in the premier scientific journal
Nature in 1986, described how he viewed the universe while
on LSD - pocked with black holes containing antimatter,
for which time runs backward. He has been known to show
photographs of nude girlfriends during his lectures, their
bodies traced with Mandelbrot fractal patterns. And as a
side project, he is developing a company which sells lockets
containing the DNA of rock stars. But it is his views on
AIDS that have really set the scientific establishment fuming.
Mullis, like his friend and colleague
Dr. Peter Duesberg, does not believe that AIDS is caused
by the retrovirus HIV. He is long-standing member of the
Group for the Reappraisal of the HIV-AIDS Hypothesis, the
500-member protest organization pushing for a re-examination
of the cause of AIDS.
One of Duesberg's strongest arguments
in the debate has been that the HIV virus is barely detectable
in people who suffer from AIDS. Ironically, when PCR was
applied to HIV research, around 1989, researchers claimed
to have put this complaint to rest. Using the new technology,
they were suddenly able to see viral particles in the quantities
they couldn't see before. Scientific articles poured forth
stating that HIV was now 100 times more prevalent than was
previously thought. But Mullis himself was unimpressed.
"PCR made it easier to see that certain people are infected
with HIV," he told Spin in 1992," and some of those people
came down with symptoms of AIDS. But that doesn't begin
even to answer the question, 'Does HIV cause it?'"
Mullis then went on to echo one
of Duesberg's most controversial claims. "Human beings are
full of retroviruses," he said, "We don't know if it is
hundreds or thousands or hundreds of thousands. We've only
recently started to look for them. But they've never killed
anybody before. People have always survived retroviruses."
Mullis challenged the popular
wisdom that the disease-causing mechanisms of HIV are simply
too "mysterious" to comprehend. "The mystery of that damn
virus," he said at the time, "has been generated by the
$2 billion a year they spend on it. You take any other virus,
and you spend $2 billion, and you can make up some great
mysteries about it too."
Like so many great scientific
discoveries, the ideas for PCR came suddenly, as if by direct
transmission from another realm. It was during a late-night
drive in 1984, the same year, ironically that HIV was announced
to be the "probable" cause of AIDS.
"I was just driving and thinking
about ideas and suddenly I saw it," Mullis recalls. "I saw
the polymerase chain reaction as clear as if it were up
on a blackboard in my head, so I pulled over and started
scribbling." A chemist friend of his was asleep in the car,
and, as Mullis described in a recent special edition of
Scientific American: "Jennifer objected groggily to the
delay and the light, but I exclaimed I had discovered something
fantastic. Unimpressed, she went back to sleep."
Mullis kept scribbling calculations,
tight there in the car, until the formula for DNA amplification
was complete. The calculation was based on the concept of
"reiterative exponential growth processes," which Mullis
had picked up from working with computer programs. After
much table-pounding, he convinced the small California biotech
company he was working for, Cetus, that he was to something.
Good thing they finally listened: They sold the patent for
PCR to Hoffman-LaRoche for the staggering $300 million -
the most money ever paid for a patent. Mullis meanwhile
received a $10,000 bonus.
Mullis's mother reports that
as a child, her lively son got into all kinds of trouble
- shutting down the house's electricity, building rockets,
and blasting small frogs hundreds of feet into the air.
These days, he likes to surf, Rollerblade, take pictures,
party with his friends - most of them whom are not scientists
- and all, he loves to write.
Mullis is notoriously difficult
to track down and interview. I had left several messages
on his answering machine at home, but had gotten no response.
Finally, I called him in the late evening and he picked
up, in the middle of bidding farewell to some dinner guests.
He insisted he would not give me an interview, but after
a while, a conversation was underway, and I asked if I couldn't
just please turn my tape recorder on. "Oh what the hell,"
he gruffed. "Turn the fucker on."
Our talk focused on AIDS. Though
Mullis has not been particularly vocal about his HIV skepticism,
his convictions have not, to his credit, been muddled or
softened by his recent success and mainstream acceptability.
He seems to revel in his newly acquired power. "They can't
pooh-pooh me now, because of who I am," he says with a chuckle
- and by all accounts, he's using that power effectively.
When ABC's Nightline approached
Mullis about participating in a documentary on himself,
he instead urged them to focus their attention on the HIV
debate. "That's a much more important story," he told the
producers, who up to that point had never acknowledged the
controversy. In the end, Nightline ran a two-part series,
the first on Kary Mullis, the second on the HIV debate.
Mullis was hired by ABC for a two-week period, to act as
their scientific consultant and direct them to sources.
The show was superb, and represented
a historic turning point, possibly even the end of the seven-year
media blackout on the HIV debate. But it still didn't fulfil
Mullis ultimate fantasy. "What ABC needs to do," says Mullis,
"is talk to [Chairman of the National Institutes of Allergy
and Infectious Diseases (NIAID) Dr. Anthony] Fauci and [Dr.
Robert] Gallo [one of the discoverers of HIV] and show that
they're assholes, which I could do in ten minutes."
But, I point out, Gallo will
refuse to discuss the HIV debate, just as he's always done.
"I know he will," Mullis shoots
back, anger rising in his voice. "But you know what? I would
be willing to chase the little bastard from his car to his
office and say, 'This is Kary Mullis trying to ask you a
goddamn simple question,' and let the cameras follow. If
people think I'm a crazy person, that's okay. But here's
a Nobel Prize-winner trying to ask a simple question from
those who spent $22 billion and killed 100,000 people. It
has to be on TV. It's a visual thing. I'm not unwilling
to do something like that."
He pauses, then continues. "And
I don't care about making an ass of myself because most
people realize I am one."
While many people, even within
the ranks of the HIV dissidents, have of late tried to distance
themselves from the controversial Duesberg, Mullis defends
him passionately and seems genuinely concerned about his
fate. "I was trying to stress this point to the ABC people"
he says, "that Peter has been abused seriously by the scientific
establishment, to the point where he can't even do any research.
Not only that, but his whole life is pretty much in disarray
because of this, and it is only because he has refused to
compromise his scientific moral standards. There ought to
be some goddamn private foundation in the country, that
would say, 'Well, we'll move in where the NIH [National
Institutes of Health] dropped off. We'll take care of it.
You just keep right on saying what you're saying, Peter.
We think you're an asshole, and we think you are wrong,
but you're the only dissenter, and we need one, because
it's science, it's not religion.' And that was one of the
reasons why I cooperated with ABC."
"I am waiting to be convinced
that we're wrong," Mullis continues. "I know it ain't going
to happen. But if it does, I will tell you this much - I
will be the first person to admit it. A lot of people studying
this disease are looking for the clever little pathways
they can piece together, that will show how this works.
Like, 'What if this molecule was produced by this one and
then this one by this one, and then what if this one and
that one induce this one'- that stuff becomes, after two
molecules, conjecture of the rankest kind. People who sit
there and talk about it don't realize that molecules themselves
are somewhat hypothetical, and that their interactions are
more so, and that the biological reactions are even more
so. You don't need to look that far. You don't discover
the cause of something like AIDS by dealing with incredibly
obscure things. You just look at what the hell is going
on. Well, here's a bunch of people that are practising a
new set of behavioural norms. Apparently it didn't work
because a lot of them got sick. That's the conclusion. You
don't necessarily know why it happened. But you start there."
Mullis points out that transportation
and sheer population growth have greatly increased the number
of other human beings a person is likely to come into contact
with during the course of a lifetime, and argues that "bathhouse
cultures of some metropolitan gay communities" enabled an
unprecedented exchange of infectious viruses. Such a viral
overload, Mullis suggests, may trigger an immune chain reaction
that could destabilize or debilitate immune function. Transfusion
of blood from one such highly infected individual, he argues
further, could transfer enough viruses to cause immune dysfunction
in the recipient. He disagrees with Duesberg's idea that
AIDS is a toxicological syndrome, but says that he feels
both of their theories "ought to be tested at least."
He is aware that this view of
AIDS - one that encompasses each person's history or "lifestyle"
- is rejected by virtually all AIDS organizations, researchers,
and activists, who consider it "blaming the victim." "It's
not blaming the victim," Mullis argues. "It's not anybody's
fault. They just did something that didn't work, that's
all."
Commenting on he hostility with
which these ideas are met, Mullis says, "People don't want
to hear from somebody like me who's not a member of their
society. They say to me, 'You don't know shit about this,
Mullis.' People say to me, 'How many people have you seen
die of this disease?' They say, 'You don't know what causes
it because you've never watched them die.'"
I ask Mullis why he ever became
involved in this debate, particularly since he's an independent
scientists, with no financial or professional stake in either
point of view.
"I was driving one night," Mullis
explains, "must have been around 1987, from Berkeley down
to La Jolla, and I was trying to stay awake. I turned on
public radio and there was Peter Duesberg. I knew who he
was and I knew there was some controversy about him but
I didn't know any details. And I just listened. And I said
this man is pretty damn intelligent."
Mullis invited Duesberg to speak
at the chemistry conference he was organizing. "At first
the audience was ready to jeer him," Mullis recalls. "The
questions at first were kind of like 'you asshole.' By the
time the two hours were up, everybody was totally convinced
that he had a good case. After the animosity wears off -
which takes longer as he becomes more of a martyr - people
realize this man knows what the hell's going on and nobody
else does. Afterward, everybody came to my house for a party.
I've got beautiful pictures of Peter, swimming in the ocean
without a wet suit." Mullis laughs, then falls silent.
Referring to the guardians of
the HIV establishment, such as Gallo and Fauci, Mullis suddenly
turns from rage to pity. "I feel sorry for 'em," he admits.
"I want to have the story unveiled, but you know what? I'm
just not the kick-'em-in-the-balls kind of guy. I'm a moral
person, but I'm not a crusader. I think it's a terrible
tragedy that it's happened. There are some terrible motivations
of humans involved in this, and Gallo and Fauci have got
to be some of the worst."
Then the anger kicks in again.
"Personally, I want to see those fuckers pay for it a little
bit. I want to see them lose their position. I want to see
their goddamn children have to go to junior college. I mean,
who do we care about? Do we care about these people that
are HIV-positive whose lives have been ruined? Those are
the people I'm the most concerned about. Every night I think
about this. I think, what is my interest in this? Why do
I care? I don't know anybody dying of it. They're right
about that. Well, except one of my girlfriend's brothers
died of it, and I think he died of AZT."
At this point, Mullis voice starts
to crack. "The horror of it is every goddamn thing you look
at, if you look at it through the glasses that you've developed
through looking at this thing, seems pretty scary to me.
Look at the oncogene people and I go, oh yeah, I know what
they are doing. Same stuff. Oncogenes don't have anything
to do with cancer. Radiation probably doesn't have anything
to do with stopping cancer. The drugs that we use on people
- all those goddamn horrible poisons - they're no less toxic
than AZT. And we are doing it to everybody. Everybody's
aunt is being radiated once a goddamn month and given drugs
that are going to kill her. We're dealing with a bunch of
witch doctors. The whole medical profession - except for
the people that patch you up when you get a broken leg or
you have a pumbling problem - is really fucked. It's just
a bunch of people that have become socially important and
very rich by thinking about the fact that they might be
able to cure the diseases that actually cause people in
our society to die. And they can't do shit about it. It's
scary, that's what it is."
He takes a deep breath, and I
realize that on the other end of the phone, Kary Mullis,
Nobel laureate, pioneer of the DNA revolution, has started
to cry. "God, I hate this kind of crap. I really don't want
to write about it. I'd like to write about something that's
easy to write about, where you don't have to come up with
a conclusion in the end. I've been writing about my boyhood,
when I was a little kid back on my grandfather's farm where
we didn't know about black widow spiders or all that stuff.
But writing about that is so easy. Sometimes in the morning,
when it's a good surf, I go out there, and I don't feel
like it's a bad world. I think it's a good world, the sun
is shining. I'm really optimistic in the mornings. But,
you know, it's not because of you calling me. It's just
thinking about this issue, it just drives me to - I'm making
tears thinking about it. I don't see how to deal with it.
I can't possibly write a book that will describe it to somebody.
You can't do a damn 22.8-minute TV thing that is going to
have any effect except to get somebody to shoot through
my window and hit me. I feel like I'm on a hostile planet."
At a recent community forum meeting
in New York, a leading AIDS activist, when asked about whether
Mullis shouldn't be taken seriously, answered that he should
not, for he is a "sexist pig." This was based on something
Mullis allegedly said upon receiving the Nobel prize - that
the prize would be "a great way to pick up babes." I present
Mullis with this logic.
He sounds genuinely confused,
pointing out that his various women friends all tell him
that he's the only one they deal with who really loves women.
"They just want to show that I'm not politically correct,"
he says. "Well I'm not. And the reason is that I already
got my money from the Swedes, right? I'm done, I'm fixed.
I'm a free agent, and it is the most wonderful feeling.
There is nobody on the planet that can fuck with me. And
I can say exactly what I feel about any issue and I'm going
to do that. A lot of people are not going to like it, but
a lot of people are going to say, 'Well, that's really cool
that you said that." And I'm not really going to care about
the people who don't like it." *