If you are going to link the OP to an article based on the technical distinction, why would you imply they are synonymous? Was the whole point of your technical distinction not to differentiate between the two? I mean no offense, but that is more misleading than the statement, "No viruses currently infect OSX," which is, in itself, correct.
I think you are missing the point. There, I was simply trying to get the OP to read Thomas Reed's excellent response to this most insistent and pernicious type of zombie reply to the question "does my Mac have a virus," that there are no viruses for OSX, when almost anyone who asks if they have a virus means to ask "has my Mac been infected by something."
The real thrust of Thomas's comments, while they do discuss the technical definition of virus, and even go so far as to say that there have been cases where there have been "virus like" infections, is to get people like kaufmann87 to begin to consider what effect they are having with that kind of automatic reply.
In fact, it is an extreme rarity that any post starting with the topic "do I have a virus" leads to the possibility of a real exploit being the cause. It is almost always sufficient just to say that "no, your situation is very unlikely to have been caused by a virus, and just formulate a reply that indicates further troubleshooting is necessary, or that it sounds like it is most likely being caused by x, y or z, without any need for any technical discussion of the meaning of the term "virus" whatsoever.