>>16494298So, even if it comes off as a bit mean that they did it, it might actually might've benefited in the end, somehow. Just by spreading awareness about the disease, I guess. And I'm pretty sure that all of us think "mad cow" sounds cool. I guess that makes it pretty okay for them to be called mad cows, then.
Anyhow, coming back to it, the name really is being too generous, isn't it?
You hear "mad cow", and you think of some cow freaking out and ramming people like a bull would. But, no. It's literally just downie cows. Their symptoms include not even being able to move. How do you think of somebody that can't even move as mad?
Now, I do know that the word "mad" is used broadly for mentally ill people, not just for literally angry people, but let's be honest, you know what comes to mind when you hear "mad cow". What I said before.
I'm pretty sure that a lot of people would naturally take the term at face value, because calling insane people "mad" is actually rather old fashioned, isn't it? I think that's a fair enough assumption. What proves my point is, you could ask literally anybody ever of what they imagine when they hear "mad cow disease", and the answer would always be "a disease that makes cows freak out?"
Or at least most of the time. I need to go ask people that.
It could've been "depressed cow" instead. How about that? It still sounds pretty interesting. I would look up about it if I heard the mention. I guess it wouldn't be as flashy as "mad cow" is, but it's way more close to reality, and that counts for something. Right?
No, that's honestly just objectively a better name. They are cows who show abnormal behavior, have trouble with movement, and go through major weight loss. What do depressed people do? Similar enough things. That's a much, much better way to put it than just saying "mad cow". That's as if instead of naming Alzheimer's what it is, we just called it "mad person".
I'm not wrong on this, am I?
