Rapid responses are electronic comments to the editor. They enable our users
to debate issues raised in articles published on bmj.com. A rapid response
is first posted online. If you need the URL (web address) of an individual
response, simply click on the response headline and copy the URL from the
browser window. A proportion of responses will, after editing, be published
online and in the print journal as letters, which are indexed in PubMed.
Rapid responses are not indexed in PubMed and they are not journal articles.
The BMJ reserves the right to remove responses which are being
wilfully misrepresented as published articles or when it is brought to our
attention that a response spreads misinformation.
From March 2022, the word limit for rapid responses will be 600 words not
including references and author details. We will no longer post responses
that exceed this limit.
The word limit for letters selected from posted responses remains 300 words.
What has been preached?
BMJ Editor Tom Moberly has highlighted that SARS-CoV-2 variants should be named appropriately.1 Use of geographical names, which could discourage reporting or stigmatise countries, should be avoided.1 It is not acceptable to use terms such as 'the Kent variant' or 'the Chinese virus.'
Surely the need to use appropriate language is well-kent?2
You would have thought so! Yet the BMJ's subsequent two articles mention the 'South African variant'3 and the 'UK variant'.4 Is more practise needed?
Is that practice or practise?
This is about appropriate use of language, not the difference between nouns and verbs. Perhaps we should all practise our spelling and grammar.
Is it time to 'woke' up and smell the coffee?
Maintaining continued awareness of issues that concern social and racial justice must be a good thing. But even the term woke has been weaponised.5 Can we just get on with preaching an attentiveness to important issues?
Re: Sixty seconds on . . . naming strains
Sixty seconds on... practising what you preach
What has been preached?
BMJ Editor Tom Moberly has highlighted that SARS-CoV-2 variants should be named appropriately.1 Use of geographical names, which could discourage reporting or stigmatise countries, should be avoided.1 It is not acceptable to use terms such as 'the Kent variant' or 'the Chinese virus.'
Surely the need to use appropriate language is well-kent?2
You would have thought so! Yet the BMJ's subsequent two articles mention the 'South African variant'3 and the 'UK variant'.4 Is more practise needed?
Is that practice or practise?
This is about appropriate use of language, not the difference between nouns and verbs. Perhaps we should all practise our spelling and grammar.
Is it time to 'woke' up and smell the coffee?
Maintaining continued awareness of issues that concern social and racial justice must be a good thing. But even the term woke has been weaponised.5 Can we just get on with preaching an attentiveness to important issues?
References
1. Moberly T. Sixty seconds on . . . naming strains. BMJ 2021;372:n218. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n218
2. https://www.lexico.com/definition/well-kent
3. Hopkins Tanne J. Covid-19: Moderna plans booster doses to counter variants. BMJ 2021;372:n232. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n232
4. Lacobucci G. Covid-19: New UK variant may be linked to increased death rate, early data indicate. BMJ 2021;372:n230. https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.n230
5. Rose S. How the word ‘woke’ was weaponised by the right. The Guardian 2020 Jan 21. https://www.theguardian.com/society/shortcuts/2020/jan/21/how-the-word-w...
Competing interests: No competing interests