It has been widely debated for years whether or not viruses are classified as alive or not. They appear to have traits of both living organisms and nonliving entities. For something to be considered a living organism, it should posses certain qualities. It must reproduce, grow, use energy, adapt, and die. Viruses perform these functions -- but not alone. Are they then alive, as micro-parasites, or are they inorganic, like a mineral?
<hr>
Lets take a look at exactly how they do go about their business. Viruses have DNA. They attach themselves to a living cell and implant this DNA into the cell. The cell then proceeds to make the proteins necessary to construct a virus. The viruses form within the cell and then burst out, destroying their creator. They are propelled out and find new cells to implant with their DNA, in a possibly never-ending cycle. Viruses often mutate. Take the influenza virus, for example. The vaccine must be updated every year to keep up with current strains. Or look at the HIV virus. It has come to be within the last thirty years. With all this reproducing and evolving, one might quickly come to the conclusion that viruses are simple but alive. As aforementioned, however, viruses do not survive alone. Every step is carried out by another organism, whether it be a bacteria, an amoeba, or a cell in a multi-cellular organism. Many scientists argue that this classifies them not as organisms, but as nonliving parasites. Others yet consider them the fine line between what is alive, and what is not. One of the problems is that the definition of “life” was never sufficiently made clear, and different interpretations can be formed. One group may claim that life is defined as reproduction, while another may decide that something must use some sort of food to be an organism, while a third may believe that merely having genetic material classifies a virus as “alive.”
Why is it even necessary to study these viruses? Why does it matter if we know whether or not they are alive? It is because whether they are alive, nonliving, or some category we are not yet aware of, viruses are part of our biological history, and have quite an interesting one themselves. Viruses can change the DNA of its host cell, aside from the usual reproduction cycle. They can mix their DNA with that of the hosts, becoming part of the host cell’s genetic makeup permanently. Viruses multiply rapidly, creating completely new genes constantly. These genes can be spread to many life forms in the blink of an eye. Imagine the impact that must have had on evolution, with genes being spread all helter-skelter. If not for viruses, you might not have a nose, or a pinky toe, or the ability to see the color red!
Also, viruses have their own evolution. While it is likely that many viruses have not changed in millions of years, many have progressed to an extent. It is thought that perhaps viruses came from fugitive genetic material of bacterium that stole some protein coating on the way out, indicating in a sense that viruses evolved form bacteria. A handful of scientists even believe that the nucleus of cells came from a virus that made it’s permanent home in a cell that did not previously have a nucleus.
I, personally, subscribe to the persuasion that viruses are alive, or conceivably a different category altogether. I think that the definition of life is a too strict. If something has genetic material and reproduces, it should be considered alive, whether it does the work or not. Anything with these qualities can’t be considered completely inanimate. Society does not consider people who mooch off of their friends and family for room and board to cease to be human does it? It seems then ridiculous to deem viruses nonliving simply because they do not use their own resources. I don’t believe using energy should be a requirement of life.
Whether or not you, or the scientific community, believe viruses are alive, they deserve further research. With their interesting properties, they certainly have potential in the fields of medicine, biology, and even technology. In medicine, the viruses spread DNA quickly. What if their genes could be altered to serve a useful purpose? In technology, imagine for a moment it has been determined that viruses are definitely, wholly nonliving. If an inanimate object that small can make such movements and reproduce itself using biological elements, we could apply that knowledge and make leaps and bounds in the fields of biotechnology and micro-technology. Research in viruses unquestionably could yield some beneficial results.
Works Cited ( So you know I'm not making it all up
)
Luis P. Villarreal, “Are Viruses Alive?” Scientific American. December 2004.
http://www.beyondbooks.com/lif72/2c.asp
I wrote this for school, and I know there's some sort of rule about articles ONLY being for this website, but I really thought this topic was extremely interesting
, and it's not going to be published anywhere else, just graded and returned to me. I'm trying to decide if I should post it in Pending Articles or Science and Technology. 
...but I'm sure the loving mods will correct me if I pick the wrong one. 
Daughter of the fiercest pirate captain in high space, and pirate wench of the SNSDW
OMG I LOOOVES TO CHANGE MY SIGNATURE!!!!
