Timeline: The Finding & Naming of SARS-CoV-2
Key events related to names for the coronavirus the World Health Organization (WHO) initially called 2019-nCoV. Timeline supports and extends content in “The SARS-CoV-2 Name Game” article. Some documents and details related to the naming/coding of COVID-19 also included. Subject to ongoing revision.
December 30, 2019
Wuhan Municipal Health Committee (WHC) issues two emergency notices for internal circulation to local hospitals alerting them to patients with “unexplained pneumonia”. Several patients reportedly worked at Huanan Market.
January 4, 2020
WHO announces China has reported a cluster of “pneumonia cases” (no deaths) in Wuhan, Hubei Province
January 5, 2020
WHO announces the agency’s China Country Office was informed of cases of pneumonia of unknown etiology (unknown cause) detected in Wuhan City, Hubei Province of China.
Genetic sequence for “Wuhan seafood market pneumonia” virus isolate “Wuhan-Hu-1” submitted to the Department of Zoonoses, National Institute of Communicable Disease Control and Prevention, Chinese Center for Disease Control and Prevention, in Beijing, China by Yong-Zhen Zhang of Fudan University, Shanghai
January 7, 2020
Fan et al submit A new coronavirus associated with human respiratory disease in China to Nature. Paper calls virus Wuhan Human-1, WH Human-1, and WHCV.
January 10, 2020
WHO begins using “2019 novel coronavirus” or “2019-nCoV”.1
Edward Holmes, University of Sydney, announces “collaborative” release of coronavirus genome for the Wuhan outbreak, deposit on GenBank, and pending release.
January 11, 2020
WHO issues breaking news: “WHO has received the genetic sequences for the novel #coronavirus (2019-nCoV) from the Chinese authorities. We expect them to be made publicly available as soon as possible.”
China reports first death from “the coronavirus”.
January 13, 2020
Corman-Drosten testing protocol released.2 A note on page 1 explains which terms are used to refer to the viral agent being targeted for detection. No distinction between virus and disease is made.
“Abbreviations and taxonomy related to the Wuhan virus are not used in any systematic way, i.e., there are multiple different designations and abbreviations for the “Wuhan virus” in this document. They all relate to the same viral agent. We use the term “SARS-related Coronavirus” to include the SARS virus as well as the clade of betacoronaviruses known to be associated with (mainly) rhinolophid bats across the Palearctic. The latest taxonomy classifies these viruses in a subgenus termed Sarbecovirus.”
Emails between Ralph Baric and Peter Daszak show both men referring to and expressing excitement over “WU-CoV” as a “highly variable SARS-like CoV.”
January 14, 2020
Fan et al sequence uploaded to GenBank.
January 21, 2020
U.S. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) announces “first travel-related case of 2019 novel coronavirus” in the U.S.
January 22, 2020
Ron Fouchier Dutch virologist and gain-of-function fan, contacts Ralph Baric, former chair of the ICTV coronavirus study group and “urges him to start the process of coming up with a workable name sooner rather than later.”
January 23, 2020
January 22 & 23: Meeting of the International Health Regulations (IHR) Emergency Committee convened by the WHO Director-General under the International Health Regulations (IHR) (2005) regarding the “outbreak of novel coronavirus 2019.”
Final version of Corman-Drosten protocol published in Eurosurveillance. Refers to virus by the WHO temporary name 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV).
John Ziebuhr emails the ICTV Coronaviridae Study Group (CSG) to solicit their views on “the naming of the coronavirus causing the ongoing outbreak in Wuhan.” Since “things are moving fast” he says it would be good to get agreement on a name as soon as possible. Raoul Groot is the first to suggest SARS-CoV-2.
January 24, 2020
John Ziebuhr summarizes the outcome of the discussion thus far, presents options and overarching criteria, and calls for a vote. Following additional emails, Ziebuhr revokes the voting and calls for another round of discussion.
Ziebuhr announces the group has reached agreement on the name SARS-CoV-2, a recommended naming scheme for specific isolates (e.g., SARS-CoV 2/Human/2019/Wuhan_XYZ12345), and write a paper that “firmly establishes the phylogeny of SARS-CoV-2 and puts this virus in context to previously described viruses in that particular species and lineage.”
Ziebuhr also says he reached out to WHO but hasn’t received reply, possibly due to the “current emergency state in China.” He expects WHO will “not be keen on” a name that uses SARS.
January 30, 2020
WHO declares outbreak of novel coronavirus 2019-nCoV is a Public Health Emergency of International Concern (PHEIC).
WHO Situation Report recommends the interim names 2019-nCoV acute respiratory disease and 2019-nCoV for “the disease causing the current outbreak” and “the virus” and say “the final decision on the official name of the virus will be made by the International Committee on Taxonomy of Viruses” - despite the CSG being the group tasked with a naming decision that isn’t subject to the approval of ICTV as an organization.
January 31, 2020
WHO convenes emergency meeting of the WHO Family of International Classifications Network and Statistics Advisory Committee to create a specific International Classification of Diseases, 10th Revision, Clinical Modification (ICD-10-CM) code for 2019-nCoV (U07.1, 2019-nCoV acute respiratory disease)3
[Need document or announcement from meeting that confirms U07.1 was assigned this day and called 2019-nCoV acute respiratory disease]
February 3, 2020
A new coronavirus associated with human respiratory disease in China (Fan et al) is published in Nature and says the virus has been referred to as ‘2019-nCoV’. Note added in proof reads: “Since this paper was accepted, the ICTV has designated the virus as SARS-CoV-2; in addition, the WHO has released the official name of the disease caused by this virus, which is COVID-19.”
February 5, 2020
CSG submits the manuscript “Severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus: The species and its viruses – a statement of the Coronavirus Study Group“ to Nature Microbiology.
ICTV makes a statement distinguishing three names to be decided, and who is responsible for each one, and reports the status of the CSG’s work.
February 7, 2020
Alexander Gorbalenya uploads pre-print Severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus: The species and its viruses – a statement of the Coronavirus Study Group to bioRxiv. The paper uses SARS-CoV-2 for a virus name and refers to 2019-nCoV as tentative.
February 8, 2020
China National Health Commission (CNHC) announces the disease name "Novel Coronavirus Pneumonia" (NCP).
February 11, 2020
Severe acute respiratory syndrome-related coronavirus: The species and its viruses – a statement of the Coronavirus Study Group is made public on bioRixv. Per Gorbalenya, the delay between the Feb. 7 upload and public release on Feb 11 was “due to internal checks that the bioRxiv team conducted at the time.”4
WHO announces the disease name COVID-19 (coronavirus disease 2019). Director-General Tedros Ghebreyesus calls the virus “the number one enemy of the whole world, and the whole of humanity.”
WHO press conference participants say coronavirus and corona, but not SARS-CoV-2. When a reporter asks about the virus name, Soumya Swaminathan says, “The virus itself is named by the international group of virologists who will look into the taxonomy,” but does not name ICTV or the CSG, or mention the pre-print.
February 12, 2020
On February 11 or 12, ICTV updates a news page to say that the virus had been named in the CSG pre-print.
Discussions take place between CSG Members and WHO. (The discussions are referenced in John Ziebuhr’s and Christian Drosten’s 2/13/20 emails to the CSG. It’s not clear which WHO and CSG members but is implied that at least Ziebuhr, Drosten, and Haagman were there.)
Feb 13, 2020
Shi Zhengli emails Ralph Baric saying she & colleagues had a “fierce discussion” about the renaming of 2019-nCoV to SARS-CoV-2.
Attachment “A unique and unified name is needed for the novel coronavirus identified from Wuhan” signed by Zhengli, Shibo Jiang, Wenjie Tan, Yuelong Shu, & Deyin Guo affirms the species classification but argues that 2019-nCoV needs a unique name which avoids stigmatizing & insulting the people of Wuhan, confusion with SARS-1, and reflects the novel, evolving properties and disease manifestation distinct from SARS-1. They propose HARS-CoV (Human acute respiratory coronavirus) or TARS-CoV (Transmissible acute respiratory coronavirus) as possible names.
John Ziebuhr emails the CSG about Chinese scientists’ opposition to the name SARS-CoV-2 and tensions with the WHO. He insists the CSG’s decision is a purely a scientific judgement, not subject to political compromise, especially with respect to the academic/research arena.
Raoul Groot, Ben Neumann, & Christian Drosten affirm CSG’s decision to name the virus SARS-CoV-2. Drosten says WHO decision to use “the virus that causes COVID-19” stems from prioritizing “risk communication and inter-country sensitivities”.
Feb 14-15, 2020
Debate with Chinese over the name SARS-CoV-2 continues via email. John Ziebuhr represents the CSG and Deyin Guo (co-signatory of statement sent to R. Baric) the Chinese. Points of contention include whether SARS is appropriate in the name given prior association with a certain disease, congruence between virus name & the WHO’s disease name (COVID-19), and how distinct 2019-nCoV is.
Guo offers TARS-CoV as a virus name and proposes “trilateral negotiation on the naming issues” involving CSG, WHO, and “the Chinese side”. Ziebuhr says TARS could make a good alternative to COVID-19 as a disease name but insists SARS-CoV-2 is consistent with traditional nomenclature protocols accepted in the field.
Feb 18, 2020
Guo, Zhengli, & colleagues publicize their disagreement over the virus name in a letter to The Lancet: A distinct name is needed for the new coronavirus5
“On the basis of special clinical, virological, and epidemiological characteristics and the uncertainty of the novel coronavirus, to avoid the misleadingness and confusion, and to help scientists and the public with better communication, we, a group of virologists in China, suggest renaming SARS-CoV-2 as human coronavirus 2019 (HCoV-19). Such a name distinguishes the virus from SARS-CoV and keeps it consistent with the WHO name of the disease it causes, COVID-19.”6
Feb 19, 2020
CSG’s manuscript accepted for publication in Nature.7
Publication of controversial “Statement in support of the scientists, public health professionals, and medical professionals of China combatting COVID-19” (aka, The Lancet Letter). Five members of the CSG sign. Virus is identified by the name SARS-CoV-2 and affirmed as a “novel” and a “new viral threat” that causes a disease called COVID-19.
Feb 20, 2020
Earliest Internet Archive date for WHO page Naming the coronavirus disease (COVID-2019) and the virus that causes it.
Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) National Center for Health Statistics announces that it will implement the new ICD-10-CM code U07.1 in October 2020 and issues interim guidance for coding case, hospitalizations, and deaths that leverage existing codes in the meantime. Virus referred to as “2019 novel coronavirus (COVID-19) previously named 2019-nCoV.”
Feb 23, 2020
Maria Van Kerkhove (Head of Unit, WHO Emerging Diseases & Zoonoses, Global Infectious Hazard Preparedness) and Raymond Aylward (WHO Senior Advisor) refuse to use the name SARS-CoV-2 in a WHO-China Joint Mission Report due to China’s history with SARS.
Feb 28, 2020
Report of the WHO-China Joint Mission on Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) 16-24 February published. Final version uses “COVID-19 virus” and makes no mention of the virus name SARS-CoV-2. Footnote says, “In the Chinese version of this report, COVID-19 is referred to throughout as novel coronavirus pneumonia or NCP, the term by which COVID-19 is most widely known in the People’s Republic of China.” [Needed: Chinese version of the report]
March 2, 2020
CSG paper published in Nature Microbiology as a Consensus Statement.
Laboratory testing for coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) in suspected human cases: interim guidance8 names SARS-CoV-2: “Initially tentatively named 2019 novel coronavirus (2019-nCoV), the virus has now been named SARS-CoV-2 by the International Committee of Taxonomy of Viruses (ICTV) (2). This virus can cause the disease named coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). WHO refers to the virus as COVID-19 virus in its current documentation.” [Emphasis added]
March 6, 2020
A group of scientists from U.S. & Chinese institutions publish SARS-CoV-2 is an appropriate name for the new coronavirus, in response to Guo, Zvengli, et al, and in support of CSG.
March 11, 2020
WHO declares COVID-19 a pandemic. No specific virus name is used in the announcement or press conference.
March 16, 2020
United States federal government “15 Days to Slow the Spread” declaration, refers to the virus as “the coronavirus.”
American Hospital Association (AHA) requests Secretary of State Azar immediately implement unique ICD codes for COVID-19 disease, exposure to COVID-19 and screening for the virus. (Three days after President Trump declares a National Emergency and activates the Stafford Act on March 13.)
March 18, 2020
ICD-10-CM Coordination & Maintenance Committee formally adopts the World Health Organization’s emergency code for “the novel coronavirus COVID-19 (U07.1, U07.2), effective April 1, 2020.9
CDC announces new diagnosis code, U07.1, COVID-19, will take effect April 1, 2020, rather than in October 2020. Virus name is misstated: “On February 11, 2020, the WHO announced the official name of the virus: COVID-19.”
March 19, 2020
UK Health Security Agency announces, “COVID-19 is no longer considered to be an HCID in the UK. There are many diseases which can cause serious illness which are not classified as HCIDs."
March 20, 2020
WHO’s Global Surveillance for COVID-19 Caused by Human Infection with COVID-19 Virus uses the terms COVID-19 virus, COVID-19 disease, and COVID-19 infection. A confirmed case is “A person with laboratory confirmation of COVID-19 infection, irrespective of clinical signs and symptoms.”
April 1, 2020
U07.1 (COVID-19, virus identified) and U07.2 (COVID-19, virus not identified) take effect. CDC guidance published in ICD-10-CM Official Coding and Reporting Guidelines. Refers to “COVID-19 Infections (Infections due to SARS-CoV-2)”10
April 16 & 20, 2020
WHO coding guidelines issued on April 16, 2020 and April 20, 2020 do not give a sense of what “laboratory testing” is testing for. The test result does not need to be supported by clinical signs/symptoms in order for a case, hospitalization, or death to be coded U07.1, virus identified.
Suggested revisions or additions can be emailed to WoodHouseSub@proton.me or posted in a Note.
https://www.cdc.gov/museum/timeline/covid19.html
Cycle threshold = 45 | A 30 July 2020 letter from the editors of Eurosurveillance says the WHO published the Corman-Drosten protocol on their website on 13 January 2020. Although the protocol shows that date, Wayback Machine shows the earliest PDF upload as February 2020.
Source: Lissovoy, G. “Codes, Coding, and COVID-19.” Medical Care. 58(12):p 1035-1036, December 2020.
Personal communication. Email from A. Gorbalenya to J. Hockett on July 5, 2024.
PDF says online publication was Feb 18, 2020. Web page version says Feb 19, 2020.
Similar views expressed by other Chinese virologists published in May 2020.
Differences between pre-print and published paper discussed by Engler and Neil & Engler.
This was a continuously revised document. Examples: February 27, 2020 version | March 20, 2020 version
It appears that, at least in the U.S., hospitals et al were explicitly told to NOT use U07.1 until April 1, 2020, and to continue following the February 20, 2020 guidance in the meantime. This directive has implications for the conspicuous and unexplained rise in J-code respiratory disease deaths in NYC.
Language under “Code only confirmed cases”: Code only a confirmed diagnosis of the 2019 novel coronavirus disease (COVID-19) as documented by the provider, documentation of a positive COVID-19 test result, or a presumptive positive COVID-19 test result. For a confirmed diagnosis, assign code U07.1, COVID-19. This is an exception to the hospital inpatient guideline Section II, H. In this context, “confirmation” does not require documentation of the type of test performed; the provider’s documentation that the individual has COVID-19 is sufficient. Presumptive positive COVID-19 test results should be coded as confirmed. A presumptive positive test result means an individual has tested positive for the virus at a local or state level, but it has not yet been confirmed by the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention.
Note: China reports first Covid death on January 11, 2020. Many people now say the virus was spreading by at least November 2019, but there's other reports that say the virus "escaped" in September 2019.
That would mean there were several months with no known "Covid deaths" in Wuhan or the entire country of China. Even by the end of January, China reported only a small number of deaths (in a city of 13 million people and a country of 1.4 billion people).
Compare and contrast to the 20,000 or so deaths that were said to happen in New York City in approximately two months. The first reported "case" in America was January 19, but the Red Cross antibody study (and other cases) strongly suggest the virus was being transmitted at least in November 2019 if not October.
So why didn't this "deadly" virus wait so many months and then - all of a sudden, in the Spring of 2020 - kill 20,000 people in NYC?
Is the virus more deadly in some cities? If so, why?