UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA, LOS ANGELES

UCLA

BEHLLI k1 ' 1)4\t'x . iR\iht . IO5 .\\LELE', . Rl\b.R\II>E . \Ah OItC.0 . 5AU kH4h( IXO i SAFvTA BARBARA . SANlA CRVl

     DEPARTMENT OF MEDICINE
     lICLA SCHOOL OF MEDICINE
CENTER FOR THE HEALTH SCIENCES
  LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90024

April 25, 1985

Harold E. Varmus, M.D.
Chairman, Retrovirus Study Group
Department of Microbiology and Immunology
School of Medicine
University of California
San Francisco, Ca 94143

Dear Dr. Varmus:

In 1981 I and my associates at UCLA first recognized and reported
the syndrome which was subsequently named AIDS. I continue to
work with patients with this disorder, and more recently with
individuals in risk groups and in the general population who are
found to have antibody to the retrovirus strongly implicated as
the etiologic agent.

I am writing to convey my concerns as a clinican about
sentiment for nomenclature which would identify the agent as the
IfAIDS virus.11 I believe that this nomenclature would be
unfortunate. It is estimated that over one million persons in
the U.S. alone have serum antibodies. The fully expressed AIDS
syndrome is well publicized to be a lethal intractable illness
associated with considerable suffering. In my view the term "AIDS
virus" would create considerable distress among all individuals
found to have previous exposure. In addition the term is
imprecise since isolates have been found to be genetically
diverse.

I am hopeful that your Study Group will also wish to avoid
creating widespread social distress, and will see fit to
designate the agent in accord with the remarkable amount of
scientific information accumulated to date.

Sincerely,

Michael S. Gottlieb, M.D.

Acting Chief
Division of Clinical Immunology