May 10, 1985

BAYLOR
COLLEGE OF
MEDICINE

Texas Medical Center
Houston, Texas 77030
Department of Llrology
and Epidemiology

Joseph L. Melnick. Ph.D.
Distinguished Service Professor
and Chairman

(713) 799-4444

Dr. Harold E. Varmus
ACS Professor of Mol ecul ar Vi rol ogy
Department of Microbiology and
  Immunology
School of Medicine
University of California, San Francisco
San Francisco. California 94143

Dear Harold:

I believe that I have a simple solution to your nomenclature problem.

  As vi rol ogy devel oped from pathol ogy , vi ruses were ori gi nal 1 y named after
the diseases they caused: poliomyelitis, measles, mumps, rabies, etc. Then
about 30 years ago this became unsatisfactory when it was recognized that
different viruses may cause the same clinical syndrome; for example, polio,
mumps, Coxsackie, echo, herpes, St. Louis encephalitis, and other viruses may
cause aseptic meningitis. Many viruses may induce inapparent infections. The
same virus, enterovirus 71, may cause outbreaks of encephalitis, polio-like
paralysis, or hand-foot-and-mouth disease.

  As a result, it was decided to name and classify viruses based on their
biophysical and biochemical properties. Thus the retrovirus family was
established, with properties best known to you.

  To come to the present situation, I suggest that the human retroviruses
be named sequentially in the order in which they become identified. Thus,
HTLV-III/LAV would become human retrovirus 3 or HRV3.  The virus may cause
AIDS, or lymphadenopathy, or fever, or loss of appetite, or may simply  infect
without causing symptoms.

  If you glance through the enclosed, you will see how easily we work with
the enterovirus numbering scheme. No one has any problem with writing
enterovirus 70 as a cause of acute hemorrhagic conjunctivitis, or coxsackie-
virus 94 as the cause of meningitis. If there is any question about
virologists using numbers, recall SV40 (the 40th virus isolated from simians).

  An added advantage of a numbering system is that the number is fixed to a
particular virus. The numbered agents may then be entered into different
subgroups, but their names (numbers) never change. This has worked well with
the adenovirus subgroups.

  When we saw an object of familiar morphology in the macrophages of an
AIDS patient, we recognized it as a retrovirus, but could only speculate on
its role in disease (see enclosed note from Lancet).

  If your Committee agrees on a numerical system, it will be instantaneous-
ly adopted. An added benefit is that patients will not be stigmatized and
frightened by having an AIDS virus infection.

Good luck.

Sincerely yours,

CY--- -I

Joseph L. Melnick