I am enclosing a list of the membership of the Retrovirology Study Group; all members have accepted, though Rudi Jaenisch
made his acceptance conditional upon receiving more information about his duties. I assume he'll go along when he learns
that things will be relatively relaxed.
It would be nice if each member of the group received the handout you sent to me. Will this happen from your offices? If
not, I can try to copy the rather pale copy in my possession.
I am not persuaded that the retroviral subfamilies require much review, save perhaps for deciding whether the "proposed
gems" (type D) should be elevated to "genus". One of our members, Natalie Teich, recently put together a 200
page dissertation on the taxonomy of retroviruses, for the forthcoming Cold Spring Harbor monograph of RNA tumor viruses,
and I will solicit her opinion. Possibly we should also be more explicit about additional members of the various genera.
I don't personally believe that every retroviral isolate needs to be registered, so long as suitable guidelines are established
for classification. What has the policy been about this sort of thing?