It looks promising - and it's likely they will adopt the new
   word because it suits the current climate of science as a whole
   (pun intended). But, considering this is a focusing group whose
   purpose was to prove a singular aim, I'd like to see decent
   contrary opinions that will argue for keeping the same
   designation that we have at present. Then we can compare the two
   opinions. It's not likely we'll get that, but I'd like to see
   it.