Is it viri? Anyway I remember in biology some 7-8 years ago at that time science was unsure if viruses were considered life forms like bacteria. So has it been settled yet, I'm curious?
2007-03-14 07:57:24 · 11 answers · asked by Anonymous in Science & Mathematics ➔ Biology
i'm taking virology right now and my professor who's worked in the field for over 30 years has told us that they are typically not considered to be alive, for many of the reasons stated above.
also:
" It's largely an anthropomorphic (or biopomorphic?) position to say that a virus is alive. We'd be more comfortable with them if they were, but by the rules we've established, they're not. They clearly cannot respire, grow or reproduce on their own."
2007-03-14 09:45:31 · answer #1 · answered by Sue O 2 · 0⤊ 1⤋
Yes. " Unlike most bacteria, viruses are not complete cells that can function on their own. They cannot convert carbohydrates to energy, the way that bacteria and other living cells do. Viruses depend on other organisms for energy. And viruses cannot reproduce unless they get inside a living cell. Most viruses consist only of tiny particles of nucleic acid (the material that makes up genes) surrounded by a coat of protein. Some have an outer envelope as well."
http://www.humanillnesses.com/original/U-Z/Viral-Infections.html
2007-03-14 15:52:30 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 1⤋
I just took a biology course recently and I was told that they were not considered to be alive. This is due to the fact that they are incapable of reproducing. Yes of course they do multiply but only by incorperating their own DNA into the DNA of the host. The host cell then replicates the virus until it explodes. One of the definitions of a life-form is ability to reproduce, which is different than multiplying.
2007-03-14 15:11:00 · answer #3 · answered by Drakus 2 · 2⤊ 1⤋
As you can clearly see from all the answers you have received, it depends on your definition of "alive." It really hasn't been settled, but frankly, it doesn't really matter much so long as science understands how they function and strategies for "killing" viruses that infect us, our crops and our livestock.
2007-03-14 16:46:56 · answer #4 · answered by William 3 · 0⤊ 1⤋
I was taught 2 tell whether somethin is alive or not by using "MRS GREN"
M- movement
R-respiration
S- secretion
G- growth
R- reproduction
E- excretion
N- nutrition
Since viruses dont respire ( i think) or reproduce or grow or take in food (nutrition), or excrete (anythin but their DNA), i don't think they're alive. Plus, all living things have at least 1 cell, viruses don't have any cells...
2007-03-14 15:29:40 · answer #5 · answered by Daisy 2 · 2⤊ 2⤋
It is still controversial because some say they are alive because they are alive but many argue they are not because they do not have the machinery to replicate their own DNA/themselves as other organisms do.
2007-03-14 15:30:23 · answer #6 · answered by Linnea L 3 · 1⤊ 1⤋
dont know anyway a virus does not have a metabolism, in this it differs from lifeforms like bacteria.
its not that easy that 'everthing that moves is alive'
2007-03-14 15:10:00 · answer #7 · answered by gjmb1960 7 · 0⤊ 0⤋
Yes, viruses are living organisms that is why they reproduce and multiply. Bacteria are living organisms also
2007-03-14 15:01:31 · answer #8 · answered by Bambolero 4 · 0⤊ 3⤋
yes anything moving and reproding is alive, including viruses, difference is, viruses are demons
2007-03-14 14:59:25 · answer #9 · answered by ThanatoS 1 · 0⤊ 3⤋
As you can see, this subject is still controversial and anyone who says other wise is not telling you the truth.
2007-03-14 15:21:34 · answer #10 · answered by Anonymous · 0⤊ 2⤋