The H.I.V. Medicine Association, a professional group, just issued a similar statement, calling for “changing federal law on H.I.V.-infected organ donation.” Its chairwoman, Dr. Kathleen Squires, said her organization and other medical groups would lobby Congress this year.

Until recent years, H.I.V.-positive patients were not given transplants because of concerns that the virus could destabilize transplanted organs or that the immunosuppressive drugs used in transplants might make the virus more dangerous.

But a large clinical trial found that results in H.I.V.-positive recipients are “just as good as H.I.V.-negative patients, more or less,” said the study’s leader, Dr. Peter Stock, a transplant surgeon at University of California, San Francisco. “Our kidney patients do slightly worse than the general population of transplant patients, but better than kidney transplant patients over 65.”

Last year, at least 179 H.I.V-positive people received kidneys or livers, up from 9 in 2000.

Allowing H.I.V.-positive organs to be used would create an additional supply when some 110,000 Americans are awaiting transplants. They often wait years, and sometimes are too sick when organs become available to benefit from them.

There are concerns, even among some supporters of changing the law.

“People I know in the gay community are very split on it,” said Michael Bauer, 45, of Iowa City, who became H.I.V.-positive two years ago and will probably need a liver transplant in coming years. “There’s the concept that having an H.I.V-positive donor could actually be more damaging. You could have a donor who has a tougher strain of H.I.V.”

Doctors say this and other risks could probably be managed by screening out the sickest donors and recipients. And for patients like Mr. Bauer, the risks may be worth it.

“I can get slapped on a list for a healthy liver, but there’s a whole slew of people ahead of me,” he said. “I don’t want to be excluded from options.”