Do we need to say Zoonotic (novel) or something to that effect? If not, then I love it just the way it is!

I am fine with what NASPHV prefers to call the document. While reviewing a title, please consider the following comments. 
1) In the interest of one health and consistent terminology, I suggest keeping terms equivalent across sectors. If stating veterinarian, then physician is equivalent. If public health professional, then animal health professional is equivalent, and so on. 
2) While the main focus of the document would be related to zoonotic influenza viruses, keep in mind that the document is proposed to contain some information about both animal and human influenza viruses that are not zoonotic.
3) Suggest that zoonotic and novel are not equivalent terms. While a swine influenza virus may cause a novel human infection, note that the virus itself is not exactly "novel"; it would be the same virus that continues to commonly circulate in the swine, that is, the virus is not novel to the pigs. The same issue applies to currently circulating human influenza viruses that are transmitted to swine, (such as H1N1pdm09 and human H3N2). 
4) Suggest that we define in the document who the primary intended audience is. If we define in the title a limited audience, other groups may not think the document would be useful to them, when it could be.

These are great points for us to discuss at the next meeting.  If anyone else has suggestions, feel free to post or bring up at the next meeting.

2/8/21: Pending and will re-visit at a later date.