This article explores the factors that contributed to the use of different names for H1N1 by diverse actors in the early stages of the pandemic of 2009 and discusses the implications of inconsistent naming practices for the public’s understanding of the virus and the credibility of scientists and health authorities. The authors propose a naming protocol for novel variants modeled after the World Meteorological Association’s practice for naming weather events, a model that would enable accurate transmission of technical information among experts and provide a stable name for public use, even in the context of incomplete or changing scientific understanding of the nature of the pathogen.
All Keywords