alive or not ?

Hope someone here can clarify...I've read that C-19 is not "alive" and never has been. It is a molecule with some kind of coating around it. When this coating is removed by contact with human skin, it then penetrates the skin and causes havoc. If it is not a "live" virus, then it didn't come from nature. Then people might say it is man-made..

@ogb said
Hope someone here can clarify...I've read that C-19 is not "alive" and never has been. It is a molecule with some kind of coating around it. When this coating is removed by contact with human skin, it then penetrates the skin and causes havoc. If it is not a "live" virus, then it didn't come from nature. Then people might say it is man-made..

No virus is alive. Bacteria are alive, but viruses are not.

@ogb said
Hope someone here can clarify...I've read that C-19 is not "alive" and never has been. It is a molecule with some kind of coating around it. When this coating is removed by contact with human skin, it then penetrates the skin and causes havoc. If it is not a "live" virus, then it didn't come from nature. Then people might say it is man-made..

As a matter of definition the biologists define life as being something that is inside a cell membrane. I don't think the definition is universally accepted within biology. So, because they do not have cell membranes and are dormant outside a cell, viruses are classified as non-living. They are considered to be rather complicated naturally occurring poisons rather than living things. The emphasis here is on naturally occurring. That a covid-19 is non-living does not make it different from other viruses and does not mean that it is artificial.

The moon is non-living - I assume that you do not think that because it is not alive it must have been created by a human?

ok thanks for the information..

@DeepThought
On its own, isn't it more akin to an RNA or DNA based computer? Like just a giant program?

@ogb said
Hope someone here can clarify...I've read that C-19 is not "alive" and never has been. It is a molecule with some kind of coating around it. When this coating is removed by contact with human skin, it then penetrates the skin and causes havoc. If it is not a "live" virus, then it didn't come from nature. Then people might say it is man-made..

If it is not a "live" virus, then it didn't come from nature

False assumption. No virus is technically alive but they are natural. They are a sort of parasitic molecule that exploits living things to reproduce.

@deepthought said
As a matter of definition the biologists define life as being something that is inside a cell membrane. I don't think the definition is universally accepted within biology. So, because they do not have cell membranes and are dormant outside a cell, viruses are classified as non-living. They are considered to be rather complicated naturally occurring poisons rather than ...[text shortened]... - I assume that you do not think that because it is not alive it must have been created by a human?

Life is not defined by cell membranes and some viruses do have the equivalent of cell membranes called 'viral envelopes'. These envelopes dissolve into cell membranes allowing the virus into the cell without breaking the membrane.

Viruses are not alive because they do not absorb energy from the environment (eating or photosynthesis) and cannot reproduce on their own.

@sonhouse said
@DeepThought
On its own, isn't it more akin to an RNA or DNA based computer? Like just a giant program?

More like a computer virus.

lol

@sonhouse said
@DeepThought
On its own, isn't it more akin to an RNA or DNA based computer? Like just a giant program?

I'm not a huge fan of the analogy between computers and DNA/RNA. But yes, in the sense that the molecule contains the rules for its own reproduction you can look at it like that. From a human point of view it's a poison, and the word "virus" comes from middle English meaning venom, from Latin with the literal meaning "slimy liquid, poison". It's not obvious that viruses are part of the tree of life and it's certain that they don't compute anything. So the poison analogy is better than the computational one.

I would liken a virus to predictors, killing the weak. They are part of the natural cycle feeding on us. No different than cancer, a fungus or bacteria looking to feed on us.

Preditors, not predictors. I hate autocorrect.

@athousandyoung said


Viruses are not alive because they do not absorb energy from the environment (eating or photosynthesis) and cannot reproduce on their own.

Of course they are reproducing...that's why they are contagious... If C-19 isn't from nature, where did the very first one come from.? Don't forget Panspermia..

@ogb

Try reading this

https://www.livescience.com/58018-are-viruses-alive.html

@eladar said
@ogb

Try reading this

https://www.livescience.com/58018-are-viruses-alive.html

thanks for the link..according to the lady speaking, viruses are not alive.

@ogb

I just read the article. The reason given why they are not aluve is that they cannot reproduce without attaching to a host.