Stefanie Greve wrote:
> Trond Erik wrote:
> >
> > Hello
> >
> > I know that virus is not a living organism, but is it still normal to
> > refer to a functionable virus as "living"?
> >
> > The reason for this question is some quotas I've read in newspapers.
> > It's about the danger of finding intact and active virus in a 80 year
> > old grave containing corpses who died of a disease caused by this virus.
> >
> > Commenting on this risk, many scientists referred to such viruses as
> > "living". It struck me as strange to call a biological robot as being
> > alive, just as strange as calling my car living when it's not broken, or
> >
> > my computer living when it's not crashed.
> >
> > Sincerely,
> > Trond Erik Vee Aune
> As you wrote you read it in a newspaper and not in ascientific journal.
> Most quotes are not as accurate as they should be, I am afraid.
Thanks for your response.
In other words it isn't customary for scientists of biology to refer to
functionable virus as "living"?
Trond Erik Vee Aune
