Thread: Are viruses alive my theory

Ok here's my theory on whether or not viruses are alive or not you can post your own in the replies too I think viruses are alive because in the beginning of life all of it was microscopic therefore the only food was other cells so viruses adapted to a life of complete parisiteism ( sorry for spelling error).and they never left their main source of food or nutrients expect to find a new one .that's why they can act like a non living thing to fool the host but I think there's still a lot to learn about these tiny creatures and all like them as always post your theories here.

Once again, punctuation, my lad!

It is generally accepted within the scientific community (although many scientist would disagree), that viruses do not meet the criteria to be living creatures. There are 8 characteristics to life.

1. They are composed of one or more cells.
2. They grow and develop.
3. They respond to the environment.
4. They reproduce.
5. They maintain homeostasis.
6. They change over time.
7. They use energy and nutrients.
8. They contain genetic material.

Viruses are not considered living organisms because they do not contain cells. They do not have their own metabolism, either, and require host cells to reproduce. They are described as "organisms at the edge of life".

Originally Posted by Discere et Docere

Once again, punctuation, my lad! It is generally accepted within the scientific community (although many scientist would disagree), that viruses do not meet the criteria to be living creatures. There are 8 characteristics to life.1. They are composed of one or more cells.2. They grow and develop.3. They respond to the environment.4. They reproduce. 5. They maintain homeostasis.6. They change over time.7. They use energy and nutrients.8. They contain genetic material. Viruses are not considered living organisms because they do not contain cells. They do not have their own metabolism, either, and require host cells to reproduce. They are described as "organisms at the edge of life".

exactly and my theory explains why

And I would read it - if I could.

What do you if you could read it it's good and it's right there!

I can't read it because there is no punctuation. It just rattles and jumbles on and you can't tell where one idea stops and another one starts. No one can understand it.

However, if you change it and use proper punctuation, I would be delighted to hear your ideas.

Yep, i agree.

This theory explained to me that you have no idea how viruses reproduce. And to be honest, i couldn't find a single theory in there.

- Viruses don't use food.
- Viruses were never anything else than parasitic. There was never any evidence of them ever being capable of metabolism.
- Viruses don't fool anything by looking non-living. They emulate parts of the cells they invade, passively, by using parts of those cells to build more of themselves.

Ok added periods and I know they don't use food they use basic nutrients and they must have started some where before they were pariisites (terrible speller sorry ) and when did mention metabolism?

Just periods? It's still terrible to read. Is English not your first language?

Also, I can't refute or agree with your ideas because they still can't be understood, but this time because you haven't explained them in length.

Originally Posted by Burning virus

Ok added periods and I know they don't use food they use basic nutrients and they must have started some where before they were pariisites (terrible speller sorry ) and when did mention metabolism?

We still don't know what originated viruses. My own opinion is that it was some kind of reproduction mechanism of a single celled organism who got haywire. Call it a biological rise of the machines..

Take ten biologists and ask them to define life and you will get at least ten definitions. Frankly, the attempt to divide things between living and non-living is a reflection of the human propensity to classify and not a reflection of reality. The distinction between livng and non-living is not a digitial, yes-no distinction. It is an analog one. There is a spectrum running from completely non-living through to fully living. Viruses, by some definitions are alive, by others, they are not. Really, who cares? We should not. Focus on the characteristics and what they signify, not on what we call them.

Recent studies demonstrate that viruses are getting closer to fulfilling the definition of life when they can steal the immune system from a bacteria and then replicate it with successive generations of the virus becoming more adept at attacking bacteria.

Do they really have an immune system? I only know of a few that bacteria can have. My guess is that it's really rudimentary at the virus. Like they could have some inactive DNAse or RNAse proteïns that are from the bacteria. But this may also be just sloppy packaging on their part, to accidentally pick them up.

This doesn't tell me for sure that they are alive. But yes, it's something ..

There is a very big conspiracy, as viruses are alive and taking control of this world. They have also built spaceships.

When we observe them they become dead. This is their defence / immunity mechanism.

My personal pet theory is that all human life is merely a sophisticated means by which microscopic life plans to conquer the universe. Our biology requires the presence of many microbes in order for us to survive and from the perspective of the microbes, it's darn hard to build a spaceship without opposable thumbs.

Originally Posted by scheherazade

My personal pet theory is that all human life is merely a sophisticated means by which microscopic life plans to conquer the universe. Our biology requires the presence of many microbes in order for us to survive and from the perspective of the microbes, it's darn hard to build a spaceship without opposable thumbs.

I recall that we proposed a similar idea in this thread: Your microbiome and you

Originally Posted by Cogito Ergo Sum

Originally Posted by scheherazade

My personal pet theory is that all human life is merely a sophisticated means by which microscopic life plans to conquer the universe. Our biology requires the presence of many microbes in order for us to survive and from the perspective of the microbes, it's darn hard to build a spaceship without opposable thumbs.

I recall that I proposed a similar idea in this thread: Your microbiome and you

LOL...
I have proposed it many times over the years on other forums.
Let's just share the credit for this (not so) original thought, shall we?