I know the dictionary definition doesn’t quite fit them, however definitions change. At one point we believed that flying was only for birds, then we changed our minds. Maybe, just maybe we may have to change that definition to fit viruses. When it comes down to it, they do replicate. They need a cell just like semen needs an egg!

At the end of the day, are viruses alive? it comes down to personal opinion. There is no fact either way, like say a rock-a rock is not alive, end of, but viruses….. 

Viral replication is allegedly a process which takes place under definite and specifiable conditions. Therefore, if virus particles release energy say, during virus entry, what precisely are the conditions which determine that the released energy will be used in viral replication and not something else? I also asked you for some criticisms whether constructive or destructive of my post (9 months ago)regarding the problem of teleology etc in the explanation of the process of viral replication/infection.I would appreciate your answers/comments to these issues when you have the time.Best regards

If the  the human body is conceived as a type of physical machine that runs in accordance with Newtonian principles, then that position requires viruses to ‘function’ in the host body in a similar manner. However, the whole process of viral infection/reproduction is problematic as it currently stands for a number of different reasons that I have discussed in other posts.

Viruses reproduce squat – you are correct.

Still no response from Prof. Racaniello. Would have appreciated some constructive (or destructive) criticisms!

Perhaps you can explain to me in scientific terms precisely how the host cells are constrained to function so that they really do reproduce an ‘active virus’ and not something else. Secondly, in what way is a virus ‘active’ and what methods are used to determine that there is indeed an ‘active virus’ present as opposed to something else that may be causing the cell to produce particles that may look like viruses but are not?

 ’Injecting its genetics’ by the way, even if we concede that a virus could do that, may not be sufficient to secure the viral reproduction/infection process  in the host that is usually blamed for causing a certain disease.

There is no ‘border’ between biotic and abiotic where viruses can be conveniently placed, and to imply that they have been proven to evolve over time without metabolism and energy via natural selection is simply science fiction. Only living organisms have been found to evolve and according to most virologists and microbiologists viruses are not living organisms in the strict sense. Claims have been made that viruses have been ‘found’ in the fossil record but such claims have not stood up to rigorous scientific scrutiny.

In a nutshell, what viruses actually are and how they really operate can never be completely understood and explained within the current scientific framework which merely contents itself with the study of the physical appearances and chemical composition of bits of genetic material (and their deleterious effects on susceptible host cells in the case of alleged ’pathogenic’ viruses).