> So your problem is branding related. You dont like the logo or theme music? That's one of my issues, I think the words we use are important. > When you are

> So your problem is branding related. You dont like the logo or theme music? That's one of my issues, I think the words we use are important. > When you are 100% free from cancer you are still a cancer patient but its said to be 'in remission'. Actually, the term "in remission" is used because the signs and symptoms might have disappeared, but cancer may still be in the body. It means cancer has not been found, and that there is no evidence of disease, however due to the nature of the disease you can't be sure that the cancer has been 'cured' (i.e. gone) because it still might be in the body even though there is no sign of disease. When you are 100% free of cancer you are said to be cured, however as this can not be known, some doctors say you are "cured" after 5 years of complete remission, because that gives a sufficient degree of certainty that the cancer is gone. > It is the most consistent with medical language used to date, as such could not possibly be described as being thrown around for PR purpopses or just out right fear mongering. It might be an improvement, although personally I think the main issue is bundling it all together is misleading, as you bundle the extreme cases with the less-severe ones. If 1% of people have 'long covid' there is a big difference between 0.9% of people having a slightly reduced sense of taste after 12 weeks which recovers after 6 months and 0.1% of people having chronic fatigue forever, and visa-versa. The bundling together as a singular 'Long Covid' I personally think is an intentional language tactic increase compliance to rules IMO.