You can now rename “monkeypox”

“Calling it ‘monkeypox’ is so 1950s.” (Screengrab: 20th Century Fox via Tenor)

Our past experiences are proof enough that we, as a civilization, can name and rename things like pandemics at will if we tried. In case some have forgotten, the shift from calling it “nCoV” to “COVID-19” sounded awkward for about a month too.

This time, the World Health Organization (WHO) is letting us decide what they could rename monkeypox (MPX).

Over two months ago, the WHO had announced their plans to change the disease’s name. Part of the reason behind these plans? It was wrongly named in the first place.

In 1958, a group of scientists first discovered the MPX virus among a group of monkeys. Scientists would later trace the virus in other animals like rodents, marsupials, and other non-human primates. Sadly, this information hasn’t stopped people from attacking monkeys in their communities.

Plus, contrary to popular opinion, the virus was first discovered in a lab in Denmark, not Africa. The first human case would not be identified in a child in Congo till 1970. 

“In the context of the current global outbreak, continued reference to, and nomenclature of this virus being African is not only inaccurate but is also discriminatory and stigmatizing,” said a group of over 30 international scientists in a letter to the public health community. Ironically, Western nations didn’t mind it ravaging the African continent for decades until it arrived at their shores this year.

The “current best practice” is by giving “names with the aim to avoid causing offense to any cultural, social, national, regional, professional, or ethnic groups, and minimize any negative impact on trade, travel, tourism or animal welfare,” said the WHO.

And so last Friday, the WHO finally announced its new names for MPX’s subvariants: Clade one (I) for the former Congo Basin (Central African) clade and Clade two (II) for the former West African clade.

A platform for stigma

Here’s where the general public can join in. 

In the same news release, the WHO continued to invite proposals for a new name for “monkeypox.” Anyone wishing to do so could sign up to submit their entries here. As of writing, there have been 24 entries on the International Classification of Diseases (ICD) site.

Some entries vie for legitimate rockstar status in the international public health community, but there were others who quickly took it as an opportunity to be—if you may excuse our language—assh*les on the internet too. Luckily, the ICD was quick to take down these entries—though the damage had already been done and may still continue, for as long as the portal stays open to the public. If anything, it just means that not even the WHO can control the harmful stigma against the LGBTQ+ community authorities have failed to tamp out at the start of the outbreak. 

Worse, it’s just a preview into the butterfly effect that’s only continued to grow around this stigma since May. Now, things are starting to look like a replay of the HIV/AIDS epidemic of the ‘80s. It’s also led to low testing outcomes everywhere, from the US to Spain and India. The worst-case scenario for this stigma is if it would result in the poorer health outcomes and social opression—humiliation, imprisonment, and even death—of MPX patients in countries where homosexuality is still illegal.

Putting the “public” back in public health communications

If open platforms have allowed harmful stigma to spread, is it still wise to let the public have a say in how MPX, let alone other diseases, should be communicated? The ICD’s mechanism allows registered users to agree or disagree with any of the entries, but is that enough to remedy misinformation?

Time and time again, relying on crowdsourcing to influence major communications decisions in any industry has proven effective. If it’s done using everyday, expert-approved language anyone could understand and remember, that’s even better. 

This extends past renaming MPX. Some guy on Twitter once named an Omicron subvariant “Centaurus” and it stuck. Middle schoolers have also helped name Mars rovers in the past. 

So far, the ICD has heavy contenders in new names like “ZPOX-22” (short for “Zoonosis Pox”) and “OPD-22” (short for “Orthopoxviral Disease 2022 Clade”). But perhaps what gives these entries more value is the unique human insight and history behind each one. More novel ones which have caught our eye are “Bigpox” (“This name is suggested using from a personal experience of being a survivor of a ‘Smallpox’ infection while growing up in 1978 in India [as] a 4-5 year old child,” wrote a Miku Shah) and “MOVID-22” (“It relates to the feelings behind the name COVID-19, which would make people pay more attention to the virus,” wrote an Elliot Kim).

“Monkeypox” was also drawn from the personal preference and experience of a group of Danish scientists from the ‘50s, after all. It’s high time someone living through it in 2022 could call it as it is.