The way I see it is that we have a phrase which is widely understood. If you can come up with some new designation for that theory, whatever it may be, that will be widely accepted and understood then so be it.
No it is not widely understood as that Quantum Gravity has a precise meaning for how GR and QM join.
Please go and ask a scientist who is working on MOND if it is a quantum gravity theory and see what they say ... seriously go and do it because I doubt any will answer they are working on a Quantum Gravity theory.
My answer is Modified Newtonian Dynamics falls in the informal category of a "fringe theory" specifically, it falls in the category of an "alternative gravity theory" because it proposes fundamental changes to our understanding of the way gravity works. Hence it can't be described as a quantum gravity theory by any stretch of the definition. In MOND quantum mechanics basically stays as something that is crushed at large scales by macro effects so that is the join.
This is my issue I don't understand how you remotely call something like MOND a quantum gravity theory.
If you look at the definition of Quantum gravity the first sentence gives you the problem (
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Quantum_gravity)
=> Quantum gravity (QG) is a field of theoretical physics that seeks to
describe the force of gravity according to the principles of quantum mechanics.What does someone doing in science experiments in MOND give a rats about QM they don't view gravity has anything to do with QM so that is hardly according to the principles of QM????
If we go back to the flying pig if I called any experiment on pigs a "flying pig" test does that not make things more than a bit confusing to you. Just imagine how many "flying pig" tests a vet could do none of them remotely having anything to do with an actual flying pig.
Let me throw a specific case at you, so you are happy to call Newton's Mach inspired rubbish a Quantum Gravity theory?
I just find using Quantum Gravity in the way you are as confusing as a vet using "flying pig" tests as a place holder, you can do it if you like but it's weird and confusing to me. I think I have said all I need to so if you still feel Quantum Gravity works as a general place holder I guess I will just have to work my way through any confusion when you use the term there is no point me going on and arguing about it because I doubt I can change your mind.
For my part I will never accept Newtons stuff or MOND as a Quantum gravity theory because they put the cause of gravity coming from something other than a quantum field of gravity as a fundamental force.
Anyhow argument closed lets just agree to disagree because it's not really a science issue.
