This is an easy to understand introduction to this famous question, nicely done! I lean more toward the opinion offered by one of my former professors: Life is a term for poets and philosophers, not scientists. The philosophical question is a fun one, but from a scientific point of view maybe we're better off focusing on the chemistry and evolution of replicators instead of trying to distill some list of traits that will cover the whole bunch. And viruses are certainly evolving replicators that undergo biological chemistry…
like your videos but this is a very stupid comment i'm sorry, scientists have to have a definition on what life is because biological scientists study life
If your brain was somehow implanted with an instruction manual on how to make a copy of the instruction manual, and forces you to make so many copies of the instruction manual that you die of suffocating in instruction manuals what was alive? You or the instruction manual that you were forced to make copies of because all you could think about was making instruction manuals since it was implanted in your brain? The answer is, viruses, no matter what their state are not alive.
I'm afraid I don't see how your two-phase explanation answers the question. A cell is alive whether or not it's infected with a virus. The addition of virus particles doesn't make it any more or less alive (until the virus kills the cell). That doesn't really say anything about whether the virus is alive. You could just as well say that salt is not alive, but a cell containing salt is alive, so salt is a two-phase living organism. Which makes this concept far too broad to be a definition of what is alive, in my opinion.
salt wouldn't be alive because it does not reproduce or evolve. when one says that a cell is alive, this presupposes that it has genetic material allowing it to evolve and reproduce. a virus infected cell enables a virus to do just that.
I was thinking the same thing. Couldn't one argue that in the intracellular phase that the virus STILL isn't living, as it is the CELL that is providing all the necessary machinery and components for viral replication? The virus is essentially a piece of genetic material, and we certainly don't argue that DNA or RNA are alive just because they are found inside a cell. In the long run, it is really not an important question - viruses are important whether or not they are alive.
Umbert Lapagoss Perhaps salt isn’t the ideal example but his point is very valid. Just because it piggybacks onto something ALREADY living doesn’t mean it “becomes” alive cause many of the properties that define “life” are inherent to the cell itself and NOT the physical virus. the question of a virus infected cell being alive is NOT the same question as a Virus being alive.
@@ericlind6581 It coukd be a fundamental question of life or death, of what is known to be alive, meaning the cell. Is the cell/organism alive/ living? Once it ingests, incorporates, or is infected by a virus particle does it live or die?
@@anotherpointofview222 A virus is a NON-LIVING organism. That means it's dead. Dead things can't come back to life....unless they are zombies. Do you also believe in zombies?
If in the particular stage the virus is said not to be alive then how does the virus sustain itself outside of the cell for varying amount of time on different surfaces.? Did we fall short on our definition of what constitutes a cell, the outer casing in which the RNA is housed , what is it called, what's it made off? ...JUST BEING INQUISITIVE...
Speaking as a professional armchair biologist I completely disagree, or rather I think the parameters for what constitutes "life" are arbitrary. Whether or not it has a cell, whether or not it makes energy, whether or not it grows, the means through which the virus produces more of itself or the means (or lack thereof) it has to interact with its environment are irrelevant as far as I'm concerned, the only thing that matters to me is can it reproduce and can it evolve, and the answer to those are yes, the fact that its method of doing so is as an obligate intercellular parasite is again, irrelevant. To my mind viruses are some of the simplest forms of life possible, and I spit on any trained professional who's studied the topic for years who disagrees with me. So there!
@Robert Lee, Countertenor Yes. I listened to a virologist tell his students "do not anthropomorphise viruses," giving them human qualities and referring to them as having human attributes they don't have. So now I notice how much people do that and how it can cause you to think or believe things about viruses that may not be true. Check it out if interested. Just 10 minutes of it will be very informative. He makes it interesting not boring. ruclips.net/video/lj3NhPgOoX4/видео.html Virology 2020 Columbia University Professor
@Robert Lee, Countertenor Unfortunately, even though viruses can’t move on their own, they have stupid people spreading them around the globe (like the people who claim that scientists say that viruses jump from one continent to another).
I keep hearing the experts saying that viruses aren't living things, they just need a host to survive and reproduce; AND that they survive for a certain amount of time on certain surfaces. Doesn't saying survive and reproducing imply something living? Another question: If they aren't alive, are they programmed to do what they do? If so, who is programming them and what purpose?
@soro vision Does anyone know how long the virus can exist out there in the world without a host to invade. If they have a short lifespan it seems like we would be able to get rid of this thing fairly quick. If it starts getting warm soon that would also help, right? I hate playing this strategy war game with an enemy I can't see and can invade me without even knowing it.
@soro vision I'm not sure what point you were trying to make about the CDC Death Reporting requirements. I read the document. It was very informative and insightful. However I greatly appreciated and took comfort in knowing your knowledge of The Way. "I AM, the Way, the Truth, and the Life." ruclips.net/video/WDEBz25lGdY/видео.html
@@deanmuhl7417 The myth here is that this professor and many others have the the right definition of living systems but in fact they don't have it. The mentioned 6 criterias or conditions are not a DEFINITION.
Summed up: Viruses aren't alive Cells are. Note this video made it seem like cells are only alive woth viruses in them which isn't true but I'll give it a pass bevause I know better
In the debate over living vs not, if anything will be alive then calling it a seed or parasite is trivial to what it will become. How it evolved is still more interesting.
Life is a symphony, a party, a dance of different various molecules. A virus is alone, it doesn't do what cells do, it doesn't produce what cells produce. If you take a step back and try to realise, if you could hear the molecules of cells, a virus doesn't create this symphony or dance. Also cells have a baby stage and a mature stage, all living things do, living things breathe or exchange, inhale, exhale, or excreate, living things are uniquely reliant on water, require water in one way or another. Maybe start there. Instead of using linear thinking and what is only visible to define life.
Good point so a virus is a "primitive non-water based life form, which parasites on water-based life forms to reproduce". Opposite to a bacteria which takes from the body and gives something back to the body.
I have enjoyed your virology lectures and posts, wonderful and accessible! Keep sharing your great gift for teaching and supporting online access to science. Thank you.
Something doesnt need to be a lifeform to replicate itself. If you lit a fire on candle, you’d only get a little fire, now you lit that fire in candle on bushes , it will produce a bigger fire. Does that mean a "fire" is a life form? no
Some scientists think that along time ago when life was just forming viruses separated from the DNA or RNA (we used rna too) of the organism because the DNA or RNA started to replicate and eventually became its own thing over time Edit: I hope you understand this
Mark are you asking How like in how it was actually made? Do you think someone watching these videos really knows how a virus particle is made? But to use your word created in relation to a concept I believe in, a virus was created by the Creator of everything else created that man didn't create himself.
I understand the debate and also this type of explanation. To me, this explanation seems like an analogy for a spore/seed-plant mechanism; a seed in itself is not alive, but with the right conditions it becomes alive. Of course, there are more questions; for example, if the cell eventually dies, then, why the mechanism? Reading other explanations, I thought about the virus as a defense mechanism or a poisonous protein; could these apply?
@@jakejones5736 bacteria do not need to be parasite to be alive, virus like seed, if not attached or inside targeted cell, they're dormant and like a thing
I'm searching for that answer too... If it can only be alive inside a cell then how is the corona virus particle getting into people's cell? Would it not need it be injected into the person to reach their cell?
3:00 He defines a virus as an organism with two phases..... organism..... as someone wrote in another comment this question is better left for poets and philosophers. Racaniello struck out in this video, imho...
The definition of life has come a long way. It’s no longer the narrow description we learned in high school. I wouldn’t know how to answer the question. We still have a lot to learn. I think it’s ok to say “I don’t know”.
The cell is alive, the virus is not. The virus is just a set of programs in the cell that is alive. The cell produces the new viruses, the virus does not. The virus in the cell is still not alive. The cell is doing everything. It reads the instructions from the virus and carries out the function, which is to make many copies of the original. Saying the virus is alive in a cell would be like saying a computer program becomes alive in a computer if that program was to copy itself many times. 😂
Hi, this is a remarkable video. I have read the book by Addy Pros "What's Life" and I think he made very nice points there. The concept of DKS is a very important concept to consider if we are to tackle this question. Watching your video,I became confused as to how a non-living structure like the virus particle goes around infecting cells or, for that matter, doing any thing ..? .. I think viruses are not just dead. .. :)
A virus needs a host called Cell, humans need a host called Planet. The write definition is: Is a virus alive from our point of view? No. Is a virus alive from an objective point of view: Yes and No, as everything.
If it isn't alive before coming in contact with cells, why there is time period like aerosols for up to three hours, up to four hours on copper, up to 24 hours on cardboard and up to two to three days on plastic and stainless steel ?
They don't "live" in the air. It's moreso they maintain their ability to become activated, If they come into contact with a host cell. It's a piece of code, that becomes activated and executes/ runs its instructions (genetic material/rna) after its installed (infects) inside a cell, that possesses the biological "hardware" needed to run the viruses pre programmed application. *To put it in pseudo computer terms.
If I accidentally shoot myself in the head with a nail gun, and the nail hits the creative part of my brain and somehow makes me want to make carpenter nails for a living, is that nail considered alive then?
@@jakejones5736 I'm pretty certain that a virus doesn't operate under it's own power. Duplication is done by the cell and no physical part is carried over in that process. The rest is left to random chance.
The first criteria you set for life is a non sequitur. By saying one or more, you encompass all cells, and a cell is just another word for box, cubicle, enclousre, and so on. the point about evolving is also subject to scrutiny in my book, because changing form doesn't require volition, as in consciousness. This happens to molecules all the time, and it's because of electricity. You could say that electrons are living beings by that criteria. How can you call it an organism when it doesn't meet any of your own criteria set for life? That's criminally negligent. It seems to me that cells eat these protein capsules for the protein, and then get dissolved, or not, by the acid, RNA, which is inside of the ... virus, exosome, particle, whatever you want to call these multituduous, if that's a word, particles, and that this only occurs if the acid inside of this semi-biotic thingy is potent enough to dissolve an entire cell. I don't think that drinking bleach is good for you, and, I, likewise, recognize that an alkaline environment in a living thing is more robust to tackle outside influence, as is proved by the fact that most plants are alkaline, and meats acidic - plants can withstand attacks from microorganisms to a much greater degree because of having a hard outer shell, and the ability to withdraw water and nutrition from soil, which is absolutely teeming with microorganisms.
But how viruses know that needs cells to duplicate??how viruses know the path to invade cells?And viruses have brain to think?too many questions with out answers
In the same way that all the cells in your body "know" what to do in their own environment - it's the chemistry and physics behind their interactions. Evolution by fluke mutation meant they did that instead of reproduce on their own.
Hi, so I have question about viruses. Do viruses need energy for certain things, if yes where do they get this energy from and why can't they generate their own energy? Senna
This question is actually quite simple to answer properly. Most people are confused. But here is an analogy to bring clarity... Let's look at a different question: Can humans fly? Birds can fly, quite obviously. So if we ask the question about birds, we have very clear and obvious examples which show that the answer is YES. Now with humans, the answer here is quite obvious too. The answer is NO. Human beings cannot fly. Now here is where the confusion sets in. There will be people who look to the examples of things like airplanes and hot air balloons and such, and they will point to those examples to present their conclusion: "Look at those human beings in those aircraft. Surely this proves that human beings CAN fly." This is an ERRONEOUS conclusion. Because it is the aircraft which is capable of flight, not the person inside it. So hopefully this analogy shows clearly that: Claiming that viruses are alive is as faulty as asserting that human beings can fly. - There is not one single human being who is capable of flight. - For a person to get off the ground and fly, you need to have an aircraft. - And it is the aircraft that is doing the flying. Likewise: - There is not one single virus that is capable of life. - For a virus to gain the full set of features that qualify as being alive, it needs to have a host cell. - And it is this host which is doing the full set of functions which qualify as living. Vincent, you are clearly brilliant. It seems to me that on this one question, perhaps you have gotten too close to it. So it might help if we all take a step back and consider this question about whether a human being can fly. Flap your arms as much as you want. It will never happen. While it is accurate that people go on flights routinely, let's be clear that it is the aircraft that is flying.
Another way to get the answer is to see what this reknown virology expert has to say: ruclips.net/video/mdYTi6yT1Ew/видео.htmlm18s *"A virus can divide, because it's not alive."*
I think it's better to think of a virus as active and inactive. I had chickenpox as a child which was an active viral infection. I recovered and had no more symptoms but we know chickenpox can come back as shingles so between the time of recovery and shingles the virus is inactive not dead.
I am a big fan of twiv and twim. However, to state that living things are required to make energy seems to violate the laws of physics. Perhaps it should be phrased "make use of or convert/store energy?"
I start to think our definition of lifeform have some problem and need to modify. The current definition was made as we lack of some knowledge by far we have understood. Virus might be the key to understand the real meaning between lifeform and inanimate things. Though it lack of many basic lifeform definition, it clearly evolve/mutates to suit the new environment and know how could find best place for survival. If it just non-living thing it won’t evolve from animal infection to another different host
i think it is possible for cells to go into a paused state, where they dont spend any energy, and come back alive when they get water. like it happens in case of tardigrades. but still as you said, this although a different mechanism, but still looks similar to viruses. great question, i hope professor answers this.
To say that something is not alive because it needs some action to reproduce makes about as much sense as a woman is not alive because she needs some action to reproduce. 3:22
o am more confused now since the difinition of life has been established which leaves a big portion of nature as dead! Can life exist without viruses? NO!
Yes, each cell has specific bandwidth and frequency within and at which sympathetic resonance can occur; influencing the cell for good and bad, including destruction. Works with everything
Are the Novel corona virus is alive and that's is true when a people is stay inside the home for two week as a result there is no human in streets or markets and the novel corona virus is no host cell and then the NCV are controlled or died plz reply must??
Look it's an interesting question.,..how long can a virus exist outside a host,..,and inside a cell it behaves like regular organic material,,...in fact looks and behaves and engages like regular biomechical systems..it's like asking the question ..what is electricity...
Jodi Goswellen Ok so follow me now. Common belief that is pushed by epidemiologists is they can live on surfaces for some period of time and thus these contaminated surfaces can infect humans that touch them. It seems shady science because I lived in NYC and took the subways everyday with hundreds of thousands of people from all walks of life and we hung onto poles and straps and were in close quarters of each other with some coughing and sneezing and never once was there a viral outbreak that would threaten the shutdown of the subway system with many people being falling ill or even the ill being on the train and not there being outbreaks in great numbers of influenza... Something not adding up
@@ptahhotep8888 , you are in the right path... Let me add this fact my 2 grandsons had not been vaccinated until going to school as it is mandatory( our bodies should never be shot with forgein substances) they never were sick then they go to school and are sick for month's. So that is something to thonk about.
@@nonamehumandaughterofmosth9808 Stop trolling Russian Troll. Viruses are infectious and harmful - they literally kill cells. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virus en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viral_disease www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK21523/ www.livescience.com/53272-what-is-a-virus.html microbiologysociety.org/why-microbiology-matters/what-is-microbiology/viruses.html www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/158179 now.tufts.edu/articles/what-are-viruses-and-how-do-they-work Your Russian Troll game is weak.
@Darnell to answer the question "Is a seed alive?" I would think you'd need to know what a seed is first. But I would say it is not "alive" but is 'programmed' for life. Meaning it has encoded instructions capable of "generating" life after its kind in accordance with its embedded instructions. Most people ignore the obvious "thought/idea", because it makes some them think of their misguided beliefs about religion. The unfathomable idea that man is the only maker or creator of things. That everything man didn't make or create, could not have been made or created by a maker like him. They'd rather consider themselves to be an accidental non-random seguence of non-purposed events. Even when the simplest thing like a "virus" defies his ability to construct or determine if it is alive or not.
@@anotherpointofview222 the faces of people when the one true God looks right at them........ When they realize we are flesh and blood and not a spiritual being to be able to exist in a dimension intended for spirits but rather to walk the earth.... When they see death is not the true end...... Imagine a rock or a sea shell having a dream...... They are afraid to realize the truth. They would rather stay ignorant to feel grounded.
I really like your definition. So simple so deep. Drawing a distinction between VIRUS and "VIRUS INFECTED CELL". Would you like to comment on thinking of viruses as CELL'S MESSAGES? Therefore the argue of whether virus is alive of dead drop automatically.
Ok. I'm curious but why exactly isnt a simple virus a cell. I need to know what the definition of a cell is and how a virus deviates. I can Google but I think a simple explanation from an educated person will be much clearer than wandering google answers. Thanks for your help
I have a basic level of knowledge in science as a humanities major. I do know what the difference between a virus and a bactetia... but science wasnt my focus
Ok so when the virus infected cell starts making more virus particles, does it project those virus particles out through the cell membrane or does it reproduce another virus infected cell, or both?
My issue with viruses is I have never seen actual convincing evidence that they exist. I would love to see some real science that demonstrates the existence of viruses. This video is nothing but theory. And what I find creepy is there is nothing on RUclips about viruses that scientifically shows me that viruses are real.
So, could a virus be similar to a plant seed or a pollin in some ways? What is the best method of destroying a virus so that it cannot function and cause infection? Certainly they cannot be indestructible.
Suppose that you wrote a computer program and it contained bugs ie errors. Suppose also a faulty ram, can happen. What is the propability that if you left the computer running for couple of millions of years that a random program could evolve properties we usually associate with alive 'things' ? Well cells rely on chemistry but not in cryptographic math. There is really a need to assign intent and we cannot fathom random processes. So are viruses chemical bugs in 'cell building' ? Since those things are evolved and not designed should we expect bugs ?
That was so well explained, thank you
anyone here because of CORONAVIRUS?
Yes
fuk yuh
Yah dude
Lol yea
Yeh
This is an easy to understand introduction to this famous question, nicely done! I lean more toward the opinion offered by one of my former professors: Life is a term for poets and philosophers, not scientists.
The philosophical question is a fun one, but from a scientific point of view maybe we're better off focusing on the chemistry and evolution of replicators instead of trying to distill some list of traits that will cover the whole bunch. And viruses are certainly evolving replicators that undergo biological chemistry…
love your videos :)
like your videos but this is a very stupid comment i'm sorry, scientists have to have a definition on what life is because biological scientists study life
If your brain was somehow implanted with an instruction manual on how to make a copy of the instruction manual, and forces you to make so many copies of the instruction manual that you die of suffocating in instruction manuals what was alive? You or the instruction manual that you were forced to make copies of because all you could think about was making instruction manuals since it was implanted in your brain? The answer is, viruses, no matter what their state are not alive.
@@joesteen4605 the instruction manual is not chemically multiplying with a genetic code.
@@joesteen4605 Man, your analogy was not that well thought out, you need to do better than that.
Oh my goodness. I'm 65 year old and I completely understood this. Thank you so very much!
I'm afraid I don't see how your two-phase explanation answers the question. A cell is alive whether or not it's infected with a virus. The addition of virus particles doesn't make it any more or less alive (until the virus kills the cell). That doesn't really say anything about whether the virus is alive.
You could just as well say that salt is not alive, but a cell containing salt is alive, so salt is a two-phase living organism. Which makes this concept far too broad to be a definition of what is alive, in my opinion.
salt wouldn't be alive because it does not reproduce or evolve. when one says that a cell is alive, this presupposes that it has genetic material allowing it to evolve and reproduce. a virus infected cell enables a virus to do just that.
I was thinking the same thing. Couldn't one argue that in the intracellular phase that the virus STILL isn't living, as it is the CELL that is providing all the necessary machinery and components for viral replication? The virus is essentially a piece of genetic material, and we certainly don't argue that DNA or RNA are alive just because they are found inside a cell. In the long run, it is really not an important question - viruses are important whether or not they are alive.
Umbert Lapagoss Perhaps salt isn’t the ideal example but his point is very valid. Just because it piggybacks onto something ALREADY living doesn’t mean it “becomes” alive cause many of the properties that define “life” are inherent to the cell itself and NOT the physical virus. the question of a virus infected cell being alive is NOT the same question as a Virus being alive.
@@ericlind6581
It coukd be a fundamental question of life or death, of what is known to be alive, meaning the cell. Is the cell/organism alive/ living? Once it ingests, incorporates, or is infected by a virus particle does it live or die?
@@anotherpointofview222 A virus is a NON-LIVING organism. That means it's dead. Dead things can't come back to life....unless they are zombies. Do you also believe in zombies?
This channel is so cool and clarifying. Thank you Prof. Racaniello for making these vids.
But would a pallet full of toilet paper protect me from viruses ?
Only if you first soak it down with a pallet full of bottled water.
thats like saying sperm isnt alive til it meets the egg
Exactly!
IT dies though. After being washed in hot water. So it must be alive first. Surely? If it’s not alive, it can never really be destroyed, I’m guessing.
If in the particular stage the virus is said not to be alive then how does the virus sustain itself outside of the cell for varying amount of time on different surfaces.? Did we fall short on our definition of what constitutes a cell, the outer casing in which the RNA is housed , what is it called, what's it made off? ...JUST BEING INQUISITIVE...
Speaking as a professional armchair biologist I completely disagree, or rather I think the parameters for what constitutes "life" are arbitrary. Whether or not it has a cell, whether or not it makes energy, whether or not it grows, the means through which the virus produces more of itself or the means (or lack thereof) it has to interact with its environment are irrelevant as far as I'm concerned, the only thing that matters to me is can it reproduce and can it evolve, and the answer to those are yes, the fact that its method of doing so is as an obligate intercellular parasite is again, irrelevant. To my mind viruses are some of the simplest forms of life possible, and I spit on any trained professional who's studied the topic for years who disagrees with me. So there!
100% agree with your comment.
I liked that attitude.
No they’re not. Saved you five-minutes.
It’s fascinating that something that can act of it’s own accord on its environment is not alive. Simply fascinating.
Is it "acting" on its own accord?"
@Robert Lee, Countertenor
Yes. I listened to a virologist tell his students "do not anthropomorphise viruses," giving them human qualities and referring to them as having human attributes they don't have. So now I notice how much people do that and how it can cause you to think or believe things about viruses that may not be true.
Check it out if interested. Just 10 minutes of it will be very informative. He makes it interesting not boring.
ruclips.net/video/lj3NhPgOoX4/видео.html
Virology 2020 Columbia University Professor
@Robert Lee, Countertenor Unfortunately, even though viruses can’t move on their own, they have stupid people spreading them around the globe (like the people who claim that scientists say that viruses jump from one continent to another).
Computer viruses are very analogous. They cannot be "alive" without a computer to run them.
So viruses, cannot live without cells
@@RivandaBakhtiar Pretty much. Actually, it is the cell that does all the work.
@soro vision Good one!
Ur video helped me really understand what a virus is. Thank u so much.! 👍♥️
Great video!!! Me and my classmates really made good use of this video. Thank you Vincent.
Can Viruses be analogy to Seeds. Are seeds Alive?
I was thinking the same, they can be like seeds or spores?? But I believe they are errors that escaped from cells.
I keep hearing the experts saying that viruses aren't living things, they just need a host to survive and reproduce; AND that they survive for a certain amount of time on certain surfaces. Doesn't saying survive and reproducing imply something living? Another question: If they aren't alive, are they programmed to do what they do? If so, who is programming them and what purpose?
The creator and programmer of all life, what else?
@soro vision Does anyone know how long the virus can exist out there in the world without a host to invade. If they have a short lifespan it seems like we would be able to get rid of this thing fairly quick. If it starts getting warm soon that would also help, right? I hate playing this strategy war game with an enemy I can't see and can invade me without even knowing it.
@soro vision
I'm not sure what point you were trying to make about the CDC Death Reporting requirements. I read the document. It was very informative and insightful.
However I greatly appreciated and took comfort in knowing your knowledge of The Way.
"I AM, the Way, the Truth, and the Life."
ruclips.net/video/WDEBz25lGdY/видео.html
It would appear that I'm not a lifeform.
I'm having a hard time reproducing. 😅
Oddgeir Just cost you some cash to become “alive” again.
Maybe you are incel?
@@ericlind6581 wow just at wow
Than my question is: how do viruses "live" on inanimate objects for hours or days?
That is a myth.
@@deanmuhl7417 a myth that they live on inanimate objects? So you're saying the 5 second rule really does apply?
@@elisefettes9991 Viruses are non living but bacteria on the other hand......
@@deanmuhl7417 The myth here is that this professor and many others have the the right definition of living systems but in fact they don't have it. The mentioned 6 criterias or conditions are not a DEFINITION.
They don't, if that were the case more people would have HIV, and other horrible viruses!
If a viral particle is alive then a PCR mix is also alive, since it exhibits replication and sometimes a mutation
Summed up:
Viruses aren't alive
Cells are.
Note this video made it seem like cells are only alive woth viruses in them which isn't true but I'll give it a pass bevause I know better
In the debate over living vs not, if anything will be alive then calling it a seed or parasite is trivial to what it will become. How it evolved is still more interesting.
totalmente de acuerdo con su conclusión. Muchas gracias por hacer estos vídeos.
Life is a symphony, a party, a dance of different various molecules. A virus is alone, it doesn't do what cells do, it doesn't produce what cells produce. If you take a step back and try to realise, if you could hear the molecules of cells, a virus doesn't create this symphony or dance. Also cells have a baby stage and a mature stage, all living things do, living things breathe or exchange, inhale, exhale, or excreate, living things are uniquely reliant on water, require water in one way or another. Maybe start there. Instead of using linear thinking and what is only visible to define life.
Good point so a virus is a "primitive non-water based life form, which parasites on water-based life forms to reproduce". Opposite to a bacteria which takes from the body and gives something back to the body.
I have enjoyed your virology lectures and posts, wonderful and accessible! Keep sharing your great gift for teaching and supporting online access to science. Thank you.
It’s like a computer program. No good without an operating system.
Same was my thought. How wonderful are the programs created by nature.
i think the virus is alive but waiting in hibernation to enter the cell
If one raises the question 'Are viruses alive', one has to look for the right definition of life and living systems.
Something doesnt need to be a lifeform to replicate itself.
If you lit a fire on candle, you’d only get a little fire, now you lit that fire in candle on bushes , it will produce a bigger fire. Does that mean a "fire" is a life form? no
Just because something is dangerous and can destroy living things doesn’t mean it’s alive.
Viruses are not alive.
Where did virus come from
Some scientists think that along time ago when life was just forming viruses separated from the DNA or RNA (we used rna too) of the organism because the DNA or RNA started to replicate and eventually became its own thing over time
Edit: I hope you understand this
Vincent, you must expand your concept of 'life'. You would consider an obligate parasite WORM a life form would you not??
It has helped me a lot to understand about virus. Thank you sir!
So how was the first of any particular virus particle created then?
Mark are you asking How like in how it was actually made? Do you think someone watching these videos really knows how a virus particle is made? But to use your word created in relation to a concept I believe in, a virus was created by the Creator of everything else created that man didn't create himself.
I understand the debate and also this type of explanation. To me, this explanation seems like an analogy for a spore/seed-plant mechanism; a seed in itself is not alive, but with the right conditions it becomes alive. Of course, there are more questions; for example, if the cell eventually dies, then, why the mechanism?
Reading other explanations, I thought about the virus as a defense mechanism or a poisonous protein; could these apply?
How does something dead take over something that's alive?
Very good!
Viruses are cell debris :)
So, viruses are not alive. Got it.
This is finally answers my understanding on what is virus vs bacteria, thank you!
Yes, they're very different
@@Cleeon Yet both very much ALIVE!
@@jakejones5736 bacteria do not need to be parasite to be alive, virus like seed, if not attached or inside targeted cell, they're dormant and like a thing
@@Cleeon Yup. Just like an egg. Dormant, but alive.
@@jakejones5736 yes, when many scientist debating it alive or not, I remember the concept of seed
With these conditions I'm not even alive.
If virus is dead particle, exactly what happens when a dead virus cell attaches to living cell? How a dead thing enter a living thing?
I'm searching for that answer too... If it can only be alive inside a cell then how is the corona virus particle getting into people's cell? Would it not need it be injected into the person to reach their cell?
How did a virus particle(not infected cell) exist if it wasn't alive. Like the potential to infect and replicate is a living property right?
They say viruses are DNA RNA and protein...which I thought was made in cells...How they become free radicals is the question
Thanks for posting this! I found it helpful
3:00 He defines a virus as an organism with two phases..... organism..... as someone wrote in another comment this question is better left for poets and philosophers. Racaniello struck out in this video, imho...
The definition of life has come a long way. It’s no longer the narrow description we learned in high school. I wouldn’t know how to answer the question. We still have a lot to learn. I think it’s ok to say “I don’t know”.
ruclips.net/video/hcG5IBHrvYo/видео.html. Check it out.
If not alive...then how can it respond to release RNA ?
it doesn't. the cell's environment breaks down the proteins around the virus, not the virus itself
The cell is alive, the virus is not.
The virus is just a set of programs in the cell that is alive. The cell produces the new viruses, the virus does not. The virus in the cell is still not alive. The cell is doing everything. It reads the instructions from the virus and carries out the function, which is to make many copies of the original. Saying the virus is alive in a cell would be like saying a computer program becomes alive in a computer if that program was to copy itself many times. 😂
Viruses are created by the body t8 clean out toxins, this while Corona virus is some bullshit
That's like saying, a ghost isnt alive but a person possessed by a ghost is
Hi, this is a remarkable video. I have read the book by Addy Pros "What's Life" and I think he made very nice points there. The concept of DKS is a very important concept to consider if we are to tackle this question. Watching your video,I became confused as to how a non-living structure like the virus particle goes around infecting cells or, for that matter, doing any thing ..? .. I think viruses are not just dead. .. :)
sir you think virus are alive but why
something that's not a living thing knows what to do when it enters a host. please explain
A virus needs a host called Cell, humans need a host called Planet.
The write definition is:
Is a virus alive from our point of view? No.
Is a virus alive from an objective point of view: Yes and No, as everything.
Hello! Today is my first day as a pre-med student!
If it isn't alive before coming in contact with cells, why there is time period like aerosols for up to three hours, up to four hours on copper, up to 24 hours on cardboard and up to two to three days on plastic and stainless steel ?
that sounds like germs or bacteria that can give you a cold or flu. the virus part is bullshit. its not alive or airborne. bail the mask.
Then why do people say viruses can live in the air for 10 minutes? If viruses aren't living at all?
It's BS
They don't "live" in the air. It's moreso they maintain their ability to become activated, If they come into contact with a host cell.
It's a piece of code, that becomes activated and executes/ runs its instructions (genetic material/rna) after its installed (infects) inside a cell, that possesses the biological "hardware" needed to run the viruses pre programmed application.
*To put it in pseudo computer terms.
If I accidentally shoot myself in the head with a nail gun, and the nail hits the creative part of my brain and somehow makes me want to make carpenter nails for a living, is that nail considered alive then?
Only if that nail entered your head under it's own power AND part of it's material is in the next created nail.
@@jakejones5736 I'm pretty certain that a virus doesn't operate under it's own power. Duplication is done by the cell and no physical part is carried over in that process. The rest is left to random chance.
@@jrnz0r Most of what you said is common misinformation. Try here: www.thoughtco.com/virus-replication-373889
@@jakejones5736 I'm sorry, but that link didn't add anything this video didn't already address.
jrnz0r I never made any claim about what you just said. My claim is that the provided link debunks your claim.
I am not a scientist or a doctor. But i think it makes our cell like zombie.
The first criteria you set for life is a non sequitur. By saying one or more, you encompass all cells, and a cell is just another word for box, cubicle, enclousre, and so on.
the point about evolving is also subject to scrutiny in my book, because changing form doesn't require volition, as in consciousness. This happens to molecules all the time, and it's because of electricity. You could say that electrons are living beings by that criteria.
How can you call it an organism when it doesn't meet any of your own criteria set for life? That's criminally negligent.
It seems to me that cells eat these protein capsules for the protein, and then get dissolved, or not, by the acid, RNA, which is inside of the ... virus, exosome, particle, whatever you want to call these multituduous, if that's a word, particles, and that this only occurs if the acid inside of this semi-biotic thingy is potent enough to dissolve an entire cell. I don't think that drinking bleach is good for you, and, I, likewise, recognize that an alkaline environment in a living thing is more robust to tackle outside influence, as is proved by the fact that most plants are alkaline, and meats acidic - plants can withstand attacks from microorganisms to a much greater degree because of having a hard outer shell, and the ability to withdraw water and nutrition from soil, which is absolutely teeming with microorganisms.
Switch "evolve" to adapt.
But how viruses know that needs cells to duplicate??how viruses know the path to invade cells?And viruses have brain to think?too many questions with out answers
It’s just luck
Probably why someone gets sick and someone doesn’t 🤔🤔
In the same way that all the cells in your body "know" what to do in their own environment - it's the chemistry and physics behind their interactions. Evolution by fluke mutation meant they did that instead of reproduce on their own.
@@aetherblackbolt1301 deeper to cells am preety sure ecectrons and chemistry takes place
SB9P4 I virus is a living being, it is our biological beginning because it carries RNA
No one will ever know 😊
Hi, so I have question about viruses. Do viruses need energy for certain things, if yes where do they get this energy from and why can't they generate their own energy?
Senna
This question is actually quite simple to answer properly. Most people are confused. But here is an analogy to bring clarity...
Let's look at a different question:
Can humans fly?
Birds can fly, quite obviously. So if we ask the question about birds, we have very clear and obvious examples which show that the answer is YES. Now with humans, the answer here is quite obvious too. The answer is NO. Human beings cannot fly.
Now here is where the confusion sets in. There will be people who look to the examples of things like airplanes and hot air balloons and such, and they will point to those examples to present their conclusion:
"Look at those human beings in those aircraft. Surely this proves that human beings CAN fly."
This is an ERRONEOUS conclusion. Because it is the aircraft which is capable of flight, not the person inside it.
So hopefully this analogy shows clearly that:
Claiming that viruses are alive is as faulty as asserting that human beings can fly.
- There is not one single human being who is capable of flight.
- For a person to get off the ground and fly, you need to have an aircraft.
- And it is the aircraft that is doing the flying.
Likewise:
- There is not one single virus that is capable of life.
- For a virus to gain the full set of features that qualify as being alive, it needs to have a host cell.
- And it is this host which is doing the full set of functions which qualify as living.
Vincent, you are clearly brilliant. It seems to me that on this one question, perhaps you have gotten too close to it. So it might help if we all take a step back and consider this question about whether a human being can fly. Flap your arms as much as you want. It will never happen. While it is accurate that people go on flights routinely, let's be clear that it is the aircraft that is flying.
Another way to get the answer is to see what this reknown virology expert has to say:
ruclips.net/video/mdYTi6yT1Ew/видео.htmlm18s
*"A virus can divide, because it's not alive."*
*"A virus CAN'T divide, because it's not alive."*
I think it's better to think of a virus as active and inactive. I had chickenpox as a child which was an active viral infection. I recovered and had no more symptoms but we know chickenpox can come back as shingles so between the time of recovery and shingles the virus is inactive not dead.
Uh huh, you know what it is
Racaniello
Racaniello
Racaniello
Racaniello
Yeah uh huh, you know what it is
Racaniello
Racaniello
Racaniello
Racaniello
How something which isnt alive, or produced in human body, can make us sick???
Great! This is the better answer for this question I ever see
How does a virus re-program a cell? This is quite sophisticated if you ask me. Virus are intelligent.
Alive is taken over by the dead at a most basic level.
I am a big fan of twiv and twim. However, to state that living things are required to make energy seems to violate the laws of physics. Perhaps it should be phrased "make use of or convert/store energy?"
OK, not make, but produce energy by breaking chemical bonds. This is not a violation of any law of physics.
Fair enough. Thanks for the response.
Thank you so much sir you are the great professor of virology
Thanks for educating & what life is.😳
I start to think our definition of lifeform have some problem and need to modify. The current definition was made as we lack of some knowledge by far we have understood. Virus might be the key to understand the real meaning between lifeform and inanimate things. Though it lack of many basic lifeform definition, it clearly evolve/mutates to suit the new environment and know how could find best place for survival. If it just non-living thing it won’t evolve from animal infection to another different host
so how does the original virus, come to be ????
I guess seeds aren't alive by that logic
i think it is possible for cells to go into a paused state, where they dont spend any energy, and come back alive when they get water. like it happens in case of tardigrades. but still as you said, this although a different mechanism, but still looks similar to viruses. great question, i hope professor answers this.
The cells inside a seed are alive. *facepalm*
Explained very well. Thank you!
Wow, thank you for your insight.
To say that something is not alive because it needs some action to reproduce makes about as much sense as a woman is not alive because she needs some action to reproduce. 3:22
o am more confused now since the difinition of life has been established which leaves a big portion of nature as dead! Can life exist without viruses? NO!
Hand up!: I saw that a frequency can kill a cancer cell, is that possible for viruses as well?
Yes, each cell has specific bandwidth and frequency within and at which sympathetic resonance can occur; influencing the cell for good and bad, including destruction.
Works with everything
Listen to 432 hz music. Use essential oils.
Not quite... what you've explained could easily be the phases of human embryo, while in utero is considered alive.
You explain things so well I really appreciate the video Thanks
now it makes sense why computer viruses are called so, and not computer bacteria.
Are the Novel corona virus is alive and that's is true when a people is stay inside the home for two week as a result there is no human in streets or markets and the novel corona virus is no host cell and then the NCV are controlled or died plz reply must??
Look it's an interesting question.,..how long can a virus exist outside a host,..,and inside a cell it behaves like regular organic material,,...in fact looks and behaves and engages like regular biomechical systems..it's like asking the question ..what is electricity...
Playback speed 1.25x
How do they live on surfaces if they are dead outside of hosts?
Exactly...not alive ...it lives in our own body to kick out our toxins in us
Jodi Goswellen Ok so follow me now. Common belief that is pushed by epidemiologists is they can live on surfaces for some period of time and thus these contaminated surfaces can infect humans that touch them. It seems shady science because I lived in NYC and took the subways everyday with hundreds of thousands of people from all walks of life and we hung onto poles and straps and were in close quarters of each other with some coughing and sneezing and never once was there a viral outbreak that would threaten the shutdown of the subway system with many people being falling ill or even the ill being on the train and not there being outbreaks in great numbers of influenza... Something not adding up
@@ptahhotep8888 , you are in the right path...
Let me add this fact my 2 grandsons had not been vaccinated until going to school as it is mandatory( our bodies should never be shot with forgein substances) they never were sick then they go to school and are sick for month's. So that is something to thonk about.
@@nonamehumandaughterofmosth9808 Stop trolling Russian Troll. Viruses are infectious and harmful - they literally kill cells.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virus
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Viral_disease
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/books/NBK21523/
www.livescience.com/53272-what-is-a-virus.html
microbiologysociety.org/why-microbiology-matters/what-is-microbiology/viruses.html
www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/158179
now.tufts.edu/articles/what-are-viruses-and-how-do-they-work
Your Russian Troll game is weak.
@@ptahhotep8888 The person you're responding to is a troll trying to spread propoganda that viruses do not exist. Report and move on.
Really depends on what definition of “life” you are talking about
Is a seed "alive"?
@Darnell to answer the question "Is a seed alive?" I would think you'd need to know what a seed is first.
But I would say it is not "alive" but is 'programmed' for life. Meaning it has encoded instructions capable of "generating" life after its kind in accordance with its embedded instructions. Most people ignore the obvious "thought/idea", because it makes some them think of their misguided beliefs about religion. The unfathomable idea that man is the only maker or creator of things. That everything man didn't make or create, could not have been made or created by a maker like him. They'd rather consider themselves to be an accidental non-random seguence of non-purposed events. Even when the simplest thing like a "virus" defies his ability to construct or determine if it is alive or not.
@@anotherpointofview222 the faces of people when the one true God looks right at them........
When they realize we are flesh and blood and not a spiritual being to be able to exist in a dimension intended for spirits but rather to walk the earth....
When they see death is not the true end......
Imagine a rock or a sea shell having a dream......
They are afraid to realize the truth. They would rather stay ignorant to feel grounded.
I really like your definition.
So simple so deep.
Drawing a distinction between VIRUS and "VIRUS INFECTED CELL".
Would you like to comment on thinking of viruses as CELL'S MESSAGES?
Therefore the argue of whether virus is alive of dead drop automatically.
I am sorry to strike so low but dang thats a nice shirt! I really miss those Nordstrom boat shirts.. good taste..
When someone gets catches a virus are they catching just the virus or the virus infected cell?
Your body produces viruses to reduce toxicity. You cannot catch a virus.
Spiny Norman this is true
@@joseferrer6674 Sockpuppet account
Short answer: no
Long answer: also no
Ok. I'm curious but why exactly isnt a simple virus a cell. I need to know what the definition of a cell is and how a virus deviates. I can Google but I think a simple explanation from an educated person will be much clearer than wandering google answers. Thanks for your help
I have a basic level of knowledge in science as a humanities major. I do know what the difference between a virus and a bactetia... but science wasnt my focus
Ok so when the virus infected cell starts making more virus particles, does it project those virus particles out through the cell membrane or does it reproduce another virus infected cell, or both?
My issue with viruses is I have never seen actual convincing evidence that they exist. I would love to see some real science that demonstrates the existence of viruses. This video is nothing but theory. And what I find creepy is there is nothing on RUclips about viruses that scientifically shows me that viruses are real.
Amazing. That really cleared it up
So, could a virus be similar to a plant seed or a pollin in some ways? What is the best method of destroying a virus so that it cannot function and cause infection? Certainly they cannot be indestructible.
The world has a channel like this about us lmfao
Is a virus invading a cell similar to inhaled silica or asbestos(both damaging to healthy lungs)??
yes in ways we do not understand.
Suppose that you wrote a computer program and it contained bugs ie errors. Suppose also a faulty ram, can happen. What is the propability that if you left the computer running for couple of millions of years that a random program could evolve properties we usually associate with alive 'things' ? Well cells rely on chemistry but not in cryptographic math. There is really a need to assign intent and we cannot fathom random processes. So are viruses chemical bugs in 'cell building' ? Since those things are evolved and not designed should we expect bugs ?
How does the virus survive outside the host ?