Thread by @michaelzlin

I am realizing more and more how unusual, unscientific, unmedical, and counterproductive it is for WHO to select the name #COVID19 and reject SARS2. In fact it would be most consistent with medical practice to just call it SARS. Here's why... (1/n)

In 1981, cases of immunodeficiency emerged in San Francisco; in 1982 the CDC named this disease acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS). No agent was known at the time... (2/n)
hivinsite.ucsf.edu/InSite?page=kb…

Compare: In 2002, cases of atypical non-bacterial pneumonia appeared in Guandong; in 2003 the CDC named this severe acute respiratory syndrome (SARS). No agent was known at the time... (3/n)
cdc.gov/about/history/…

In 1983, the virus that causes AIDS was discovered by Françoise Barré-Sinoussi and Luc Montaignier. It was eventually named HIV in 1986 by the International Committee on the Taxonomy of Viruses (ICTV)... (4/n)
hivinsite.ucsf.edu/InSite?page=kb…

Compare: In 2003, the virus that causes SARS was isolated in Hong Kong, sequenced by CDC and a Canadian consortium. It was named SARSCoV in 2004 by the ICTV... (5/n)
talk.ictvonline.org/taxonomy/p/tax…

In 1986, a milder acquired immunodeficiency syndrome was discovered in West Africa and the virus quickly isolated by the Montaignier group. It had 50% sequence identity to HIV. The virus was named HIV-2. The disease name? Unchanged: AIDS... (6/n)
ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/3472076

Compare: In 2019, a severe acute respiratory distress syndrome was discovered in Wuhan and the virus quickly isolated by Wuhan scientists. It had 79% sequence identity to SARSCoV. The virus was named SARSCoV-2 by ICTV. The disease name? Well that's when WHO stepped in... (7/n)

To review, HIV-1 and HIV-2 are 50% identical and both cause immunodeficiency. They result in different disease severities (you're less likely to die from HIV-2), but the diseases they cause are (or the disease they cause is) considered the same: AIDS... (8/n)

SARSCoV-1 and SARSCoV-2 are 79% identical and both cause severe acute respiratory distress. They result in different disease severities (you're less likely to die from SARSCoV-2), so by analogy to HIV-1/2→AIDS, the diseases they cause should be considered the same: SARS... (9/n)

However WHO stepped in (why does CDC have to defer to them anyway?) and decided the ONE requirement for the name was that it not mention SARS. Thus the terrible name #COVID19 was chosen. It stands for coronavirus disease and thus has no useful medical information... (10/n)

It is an open suspicion this was done to deflect criticism for a slow response to what is basically a second SARS epidemic. Because we already knew how to stop SARSCoV, and it was bad, there was no excuse for not quickly addressing what is basically a strain of SARSCoV... (11/n)

The purposeful hiding of the identity of the #COVID19 virus (that it is strain of SARS virus) has had severe negative consequences to world health. By not realizing we are dealing with SARS, many political leaders have failed to address the epidemic forcefully enough... (12/n)

Also the term #COVID19 hinders clinical education and communication. Compare to AIDS again. Calling the disease(s) caused by HIV-1 and HIV-2 as AIDS in both cases has clinical utility. The signs and symptoms are similar enough, that it helps to consider HIV-1/2 together... (13/n)

Considering HIV-1/2 together also reminds us that treatments and preventive steps we learn from one can be used on the other. Likewise COVID-19 should have been called SARS, SARS2, or, as a compromise, variably severe acute respiratory syndrome, vSARS... (14/n)

Li Wenliang who warned about the new outbreak in Wuhan had it exactly right: "7 confirmed cases of SARS were reported... The latest news is, it has been confirmed that they are coronavirus infections, but the exact virus strain is being subtyped"... (15/n)
nyti.ms/38kC428

Disease names have always been guided by a desire to inform. WHO has taken the opposite approach, to misinform. Not surprisingly, confusion has resulted. With millions dying, we are now seeing the tragic consequences of WHO's placement of politics over medicine and science. (n/n)