To the Editor: We would like to thank Dr. Rosset et al. and Dr. Roriz-Cruz et al., from the Instituto de Geriatria, Universidade Católica do Rio Grande do Sul, Brazil, for the interesting, provoking comments in their letters. The elaboration of a necessarily limited text about a theme as vast as Brazilian aging reality1 leads one to make choices from among many interesting aspects. Although it is a fact that Brazil is a multiethnic society, as shown by its mitochondrial deoxyribonucleic acid, it is also true that the genetic pattern varies from region to region of this country, to reveal marks of successive waves of European migration during the 19th century, besides the Portuguese, blacks, and Brazilian Indians,2 as well as the more recent migrations from the Middle and Far East. It is worth noticing that the contribution to culture of Brazilian Indians greatly exceeds their actual proportions in the population. Different ethnic groups form the Brazilian people, each one of them bringing its individual contribution to Brazilian culture, which has motivated us to adopt the official data of the 2000 Brazilian Census. In addition to the regional heterogeneity of genotypic profiles, it seems to us (and apparently to the Brazilian Institute of Geography and Statistics) that, in a highly miscegenated society like ours, the openly stated race can express better the cultural options of each individual, regardless of his or her genetic profile. Concerning the Veranópolis Project, in 1996, this interesting study included 193 elderly persons, restricted to one Italian-Brazilian community3 that was not representative of the general elderly Brazilian population. Our group maintained a special cohort of 130 elderly male athletes4 in São Paulo since 2001 not referred to in the article, because they also were not representative of the general elderly Brazilian population. Other interesting elderly cohort studies were developed in Brazil, such as the EPIDOSO, in 1991, with 1,667 persons;5 the Catanduva Cohort, in 1998, with 1,656 persons;6 and the Botucatu Cohort, in 1992, with 640 persons.7 It is also important to refer to the Brazilian branch of the Saúde, Bem Estar e Envelhecimento—Health, Welfare and Aging (SABE) Study,8 a Pan-American Health Organization project for Latin America and the Caribbean, which was an important study of the condition of aged people in São Paulo city, with a sample of 2,143 people aged 60 and older. The Bambuí Cohort Project, in 1996, was a follow-up study with 1,742 individuals aged 60 and older. Developed by the Oswaldo Cruz Foundation's Nucleus for Public Health and Aging Studies and the Federal University of Minas Gerais (MG, Brazil), it has more than 50 publications.9 Because this project seemed to be more representative, it was incorporated into our study. Concerning the Roriz-Cruz letter, the authors make interesting and appropriate comments about the differences between geriatric training and geriatric medicine valuation in Brazil, the United States, and the United Kingdom. In spite of our agreement with the Roriz-Cruz arguments, the scope of our article was to describe geriatric characteristics in Brazil and not to make comparisons between geriatrics training in these three countries. That was the reason why we did not analyze the phenomenon of geriatric residence competition. Alternatively, we were afraid to oversimplify, in a few lines, the complex reality of geriatric education in these three countries with not completely comparable educational and social realities. Suffice it to say that the World Health Organization's international study “Global Survey on Geriatrics in the Medical Curriculum”10 could not have been conducted in the United States or in Brazil because of the complexity and diversity of medical education in those two countries. Of the 140 existing medical schools in Brazil,11 few have geriatrics as a discipline or an independent unit or ward, and only 15 medical residence programs in geriatrics12 were found throughout the country. This situation, combined with the reduced number of qualified geriatricians, could explain the high proportion of candidates to slots with no other variable. In spite of that, the question about differences and similarities in geriatrics training and valuation in Brazil, the United States, and the United Kingdom remains an interesting query and deserves specific research in the future. What seems clear, both in the above-mentioned paper1 and in the Rosset and Roriz-Cruz letters, is the not yet fully described reality of Brazilian gerontological wealth. This is definitely a great country with great opportunities. Financial Disclosures: Luiz Eugênio Garcez Leme is a professor at the University of São Paulo and received no financial support from companies. Author Contributions: Luiz Eugênio Garcez Leme is the single author of this letter. The concept, design, data, and analysis, as well as the preparation of the manuscript, were done by the author. Sponsor's Role: This letter was not sponsored.