How long do a virus live?
September 12, 2009 at 2:11 am #11785steelcatParticipant
How long do a virus live? 🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄
September 12, 2009 at 2:51 pm #92771canalonParticipant
depends on the virus….
September 25, 2009 at 11:02 am #93033muznaParticipant
i think when DNA or RNA of virus get entry into the host, afterwards old virus do not remain alive, and DNA or RNA directs the synthesis of new viruses.
September 25, 2009 at 6:21 pm #93042mithParticipant
virus don’t live, they’re not alive
September 26, 2009 at 1:15 pm #93066quote mith:
That’s right, stones can divide themselves as well 😉
September 27, 2009 at 2:52 pm #93105Darwin420Participant
Mith: think out side of the box….I know a textbook will tell you that viruses aren’t considered life….but that is just B.S., Viruses are just a different form of life….but nevertheless, they are living.
For example when Robert Hooke came up with a template stating that all living organisms contain particular traits, for example, they all metabolize…he was just making up these guidelines while using his primitive microscope.
Now that we have electron microscopes we are able to see a lot smaller things, and it turns out we found an organism (viruses) that don’t fit all the guidelines that hooke designed a LONG TIME AGO, and since viruses don’t metabolize on their own, people automatically assume it isn’t life …but it is, they are a form of life…they just don’t fit under the categories someone made in the late 1600’s. But that is ok, the knowledge of science grows through out the years.
Yea I said it….I am challenging the text books.
September 27, 2009 at 7:59 pm #93117quote Darwin420:
then can we say that any thing having nuclear material like DNA or RNA is living
September 27, 2009 at 8:17 pm #93120Darwin420Participant
I feel confident in saying yes.
September 28, 2009 at 8:18 am #93132quote choozi:
then there is question, what to do with prions 😉
October 12, 2009 at 11:51 am #93594jwalinParticipant
i do not know but then if we come to see of this as darwin420 says then we will have to change everything. the whole system.
who fears it. but then the basics of everything will be shaken
but i also think a virus can also be called alive. don’t we call different organisms that go into hibernation alive??? so why not viruses. they go into longer hibernations until their surroundings suit them.
muzna has got a good point that slipped off my head.
but i still wonder can they becalled dead after they enter the cells. its justa method of division in which many jwalin’s will be producedfrom one jwalin ( that’s an example) i would prefer to call it something else i am confused???
why not call even the mitochondrias living? what about ribosomes?
i do not know the original or the exact definition of the " living organism "
help would be appreciated
if i offend someone i am sorry.
October 12, 2009 at 12:45 pm #93601jwalinParticipantquote jwalin:
are cells referred to as dead after they divide.
i think not then iwas right. else wrong.
please tell me if i am right or wrong.
October 14, 2009 at 1:04 pm #93715MrMisteryParticipant
no, and they’re not referred as dead.
@darwin420, and everyone else too
Remember that living and non-living are just words, they don’t impact nature at all. if you consider viruses as non-living or a different type of life, they’re still the same thing. These are human conventions, so by all means consider them whatever they want. But remember that this whole living-nonliving stuff is just philosophical BS, not science, and therefore does not make any difference.
October 16, 2009 at 10:56 am #93791
question was that how long virus alive , it was not the point either they are living or not., when old cells stop performing function they are called dead, similarly when virus stop performing function it will be dead, and main function performed by virus is replication. shouldn’t we consider it dead after replication because it lose its identity after replicating itself..
October 16, 2009 at 12:30 pm #93797
So, you are saying, that you could ask, how long are stones alive and not care, whether they are alive or not?
Your theory has a little problem, if it was so, than your virus would cycle between life and death 😉
October 16, 2009 at 2:13 pm #93799
no i did not mean that, i think it is decided that virus is living because it has the ability to make copies of itself, having genetic material which is one of the main properties of living things, the point is that how long it remain alive,which we obviously can not discuss about nonliving .
October 16, 2009 at 2:30 pm #93800canalonParticipant
Technically, you should say "how long can a virus remain infectious outside its host ?"
It is the spirit I answered your question. It depends on the environment where it landed (in solution in the fridge, or in a droplet of sneeze on a wall in full sun) and the virus it self. There is no single simple answer to the question. It varies from minutes (rabies virus exposed to light and air for example) to days.
October 16, 2009 at 2:32 pm #93801DougalbodParticipantquote MrMistery:
I wholeheartedly agree with you here, some people would say the viruses are alive some would say they are not. It doesn’t really matter.
Refering to the original question, perhaps it would be better to ask how long can a virus maintain it’s ability to infect a host cell and I guess that the answer is it depends on the type of virus and environmental conditions.
October 21, 2009 at 6:33 pm #93974biologiaParticipant
Viruses are not "alive" because they do not exhibit the characteristics of life. For example, they are not made up of cells and cannot replicate themselves without entering the cells of another organism. I think the question(s) you meant to ask was how long can viruses exist a nonliving surface? or what is the duration in which a virus can infect a cell? Both depend. For example HIV can exist on a nonliving surface for up to seven days but once the host is infected the virus becomes a permanent part of the DNA sequence of the host, replicating again and again until the host dies.
October 24, 2009 at 3:53 pm #94054
Every living organism do not have every thing. It may take the things that it needs from nature or you can say its environment, just as we take food or carbohydrates( living source) or oxygen and many other things that we take up from environment to build up our body. Similarly virus takes the control of its host and use host’s material to build up other viruses or replicate itself. Then why we don allow virus that we do by ourselves? Shouldn’t it be called as living? It only uses material from its environment for its survival.
October 24, 2009 at 7:38 pm #94060mithParticipant
Look, the word and the concept is just a category we as humans invented. We define the boundaries of the definition and to avoid confusion, we agreed to abide by a consensus definition. It’s like, why is a tomato a fruit? It’s because we defined fruits to be such and such. Beyond our own definition, there’s nothing intrinsically fruity about a tomato.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.