How long do a virus live?

Viewing 19 reply threads
  • Author
    Posts
    • #11785
      steelcat
      Participant

      How long do a virus live? 🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄 🙄

    • #92771
      canalon
      Participant

      depends on the virus….

    • #93033
      muzna
      Participant

      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.

    • #93042
      mith
      Participant

      virus don’t live, they’re not alive

    • #93066
      JackBean
      Participant
      quote mith:

      virus don’t live, they’re not alive

      That’s right, stones can divide themselves as well 😉

    • #93105
      Darwin420
      Participant

      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.

    • #93117
      choozi
      Participant
      quote Darwin420:

      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.

      then can we say that any thing having nuclear material like DNA or RNA is living

    • #93120
      Darwin420
      Participant

      I feel confident in saying yes.

    • #93132
      JackBean
      Participant
      quote choozi:

      then can we say that any thing having nuclear material like DNA or RNA is living

      then there is question, what to do with prions 😉

    • #93594
      jwalin
      Participant

      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.

    • #93601
      jwalin
      Participant
      quote jwalin:

      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???

      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.

    • #93715
      MrMistery
      Participant

      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.

    • #93791
      choozi
      Participant

      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..

    • #93797
      JackBean
      Participant

      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 😉

    • #93799
      choozi
      Participant

      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 .

    • #93800
      canalon
      Participant

      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.

    • #93801
      Dougalbod
      Participant
      quote MrMistery:

      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.

      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.

    • #93974
      biologia
      Participant

      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.

    • #94054
      choozi
      Participant

      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.

    • #94060
      mith
      Participant

      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.

Viewing 19 reply threads
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.