A New Meaning for “Antiviral”

Paul Sax • January 2nd, 2011

Paul E. Sax, MD is the Editor-in-Chief, Journal Watch HIV/AIDS Clinical Care and Clinical Director of the HIV Program and Division of Infectious Diseases at Brigham and Women's Hospital

January 1, 2011

Dear Lake Superior State University,

Clinicians are particularly concerned about this year’s “List of Words Banished from the Queen’s English for Mis-use, Over-use and General Uselessness“, as topping the list was the word, viral.

One nominator said:

Events, photographs, written pieces and even occasional videos that attracted a great deal of attention once were simply highly publicized, repeated in news broadcasts, and talked about for a few days. Now, however, it is no longer enough to give such offerings their 15 minutes of fame, but they must be declared to ‘go viral.’ As a result, any mindless stunt or vapid bit of writing is sent by its creators whirling around the Internet and, once whirled, its creators declare it (trumpets here) ‘viral!’ Enough already!

Unfortunately, those of us who make a living seeing patients could never survive without this precious word.

When we say to a patient, “It could be a virus”, or “You probably have something viral”, what we really mean is, “I realize you’re sick, but I don’t know what you have.”

And it’s not really a lie, because literally hundreds of viruses cause human illness — and our diagnostic tests for them for the most part stink.

So I am hoping that MDs, NPs, and PAs may be granted a lifetime exemption for viral’s banishment, and continue to use it in the rigorously scientific manner described above.

Thank you for considering, and Happy New Year.

Paul Sax
(on behalf of clinicians everywhere)

Source