On February 11, 2020 the World health Organization released the official name for the disease caused by
the new coronavirus called Covid-19. The word “coronavirus” refers to the group of viruses it belongs to.
Researchers have been calling for an official name for the virus, to avoid confusion of any group or
country. In order to create a name for the virus the name, “could not refer to a geographical location,
an animal, and individual or a group of people, and which is also pronounceable and related to the
disease,” the WHO chief said. The importance of creating a name for the virus would be to prevent the
use of other names that could be inaccurate and gives a standard format to use for any coronavirus
outbreaks. The new name comes from the words “corona”, “virus” and “disease”, with 19 representing
the year that the virus emerged.
the new coronavirus called Covid-19. The word “coronavirus” refers to the group of viruses it belongs to.
Researchers have been calling for an official name for the virus, to avoid confusion of any group or
country. In order to create a name for the virus the name, “could not refer to a geographical location,
an animal, and individual or a group of people, and which is also pronounceable and related to the
disease,” the WHO chief said. The importance of creating a name for the virus would be to prevent the
use of other names that could be inaccurate and gives a standard format to use for any coronavirus
outbreaks. The new name comes from the words “corona”, “virus” and “disease”, with 19 representing
the year that the virus emerged.
Discussion Questions:
- What are your thoughts on the creation of the name for the virus?
- Do you think researchers approached the naming the virus wisely?
- If you could name the virus, what would you name it and why?
To respond to question 1, I believe that the virus was aptly named, given the current information we have on it. The combination of words to create "Covid-19," while on the nose, serves its purpose of describing what the virus is, where it originated, and the year it emerged.
ReplyDeleteI believe that the current name of the virus is adequate given the limited amount of knowledge the public has on the virus. The protocol for creating the virus' name seems to be very well thought out and logical.
ReplyDeleteI think the approach to not correlate the name of the virus to a geographical location was very wise. In the past, many diseases and viruses have been named after specific places or groups of people. The fact that researchers avoided doing this for coronavirus shows their understanding of how it would be extremely stigmatizing on the people of Wuhan, and how it would just intensify people's xenophobia towards foreigners.
ReplyDeleteIt was smart of the researchers not to name the virus after a place or a people, seeing as in the future these people, or people that come from that place, could be discriminated against, and perhaps called dirty. The virus has a good name, but if I were to name it, I would call it CVP-19, or Corona Virus Pandemic, with 19 as the year that it started. However, Covid-19 is definitely better, and I feel that WHO chose a good name that serves as a very easy classifier for the virus.
ReplyDeleteI believe the name is actually a pretty good name since it gives the disease a specific name that can be used by scientists and individuals without confusion. Also as mentioned by (https://time.com/5782284/who-name-coronavirus-covid-19/) the disease doesn't mention the place where it started (Wuhan) unlike many diseases beforehand like the Middle East Respiratory Syndrome. This is good since it won't lead to stigmatization of the Chinese people, especially those who live in Wuhan.
ReplyDeleteThe name Covid-19 is good because it doesn't cause confusion and makes sense. It includes the year it started and clearly identifies the virus. The researchers made a very smart choice to not include information about where it started. If it mentioned Wuhan or China, this could contribute to people unfairly stigmatizing the people there. I wouldn't change anything about how it is named
ReplyDeleteReplying to question 1, I think that the new name choice for the virus is a good choice because it doesn't lean toward any bias to the place of origin or the people that live there. This doesn't spark any sort of racism or form of hate against the Chinese. However, the new name cannot stop the people who choose to be biased against the Chinese. They will continue to believe that all Chinese people have the virus until the virus is declared to have been eradicated.
ReplyDeleteIn response to the first question, I think that the new title for the virus is beneficial to those living in affected areas (specifically in China). The new name decreases the relation between the country and the disease, so the opportunity for racist remarks to be made is decreased. However, because of the media's coverage of the "breakout", many people, especially in the United States, already fear the Chinese because of the disease. It might be too late to change their perspectives. I've witnessed people making fun of and avoiding Chinese immigrants because they think they're infected, and I think a much larger-scale change must be made in order to stop the hate that the Chinese people have faced.
ReplyDeleteTo me, the naming of the virus is good because it minimizes confusion and makes it very clear (especially for healthcare workers) what infection they are dealing with. What most people don't know is that coronaviruses are a whole family of viruses, closely related to the common cold (from what I understand). In addition, it was a good choice for the name of the virus not to have any connection to Wuhan or China, as this may help to prevent discrimination and prejudice against people of Asian origin worldwide.
ReplyDeleteMy thoughts on the creation of the name Covid-19 seem slightly skeptical considering it is a word mash-up, and sounds almost colloquial. While I think the researchers could have named the disease something more *professional*, I also realize that the name they have chosen is perfectly fine and that it has an origin. If I were to have named this virus, I would probably name it something that is more in line with other named viruses.
ReplyDeleteI would like to disagree on that last statement. I believe that the virus is named perfectly, being that it is a combination of all the elements involved. Though it may not sound "professional" or more in line with other viruses, at least it serves it purpose by differentiating it from other sicknesses in the group of coronavirus. One can argue that it can sound colloquial, but as long as it's not offensive, doesn't sound like it can easily be made fun of, and differentiates the sickness, I think that it could be named just about anything.
Delete