That is debatable. There are two solid arguments.
Viruses can't reproduce without a host cell. Viruses can't transfer food into energy. They don't create waste. They don't fit the current definition of life.
Viruses can more, reproduce at all, have nuclei. The definition of life was imperfect and needs to be changed because viruses fit many standards.
I personally don't know.
A virus is a living organism
A virus (from the Latin virus meaning toxin or poison) is a microscopic organism consisting of genetic material (RNA or DNA) surrounded by a protein, lipid (fat), or glycoprotein coat. Viruses are unique organisms because they cannot reproduce without a host cell. After contacting a host cell, a virus will insert genetic material into the host and take over the host's functions. The cell, now infected, continues to reproduce, but it reproduces more viral protein and genetic material instead of its usual products. It is this process that earns viruses the classification of "parasite".
Non-living, because it is not able to perform all life functions without a host.
Still being debated. While viruses have genetic material, and are capable of replication, they have no true metabolism, and must use a living organism as a host, as they can't actually perform these 'life' functions themselves. Also note that viruses have been synthesized in the laboratory, but still there is no claim that scientists have actually created a living thing.
A virus is a living organism
A virus (from the Latin virus meaning toxin or poison) is a microscopic organism consisting of genetic material (RNA or DNA) surrounded by a protein, lipid (fat), or glycoprotein coat. Viruses are unique organisms because they cannot reproduce without a host cell. After contacting a host cell, a virus will insert genetic material into the host and take over the host's functions. The cell, now infected, continues to reproduce, but it reproduces more viral protein and genetic material instead of its usual products. It is this process that earns viruses the classification of "parasite".
Viruses are non-living and cannot survive outside of a living host for long, unlike bacteria.
Viruses kind of mess up the sharp dividing line between "alive" and "not alive". Arguments can be made either way. Most scientists consider them not truly alive.
Non living
Active (non-killed) viruses are living organisms.
They are not alive. They are nonliving. They are like cockle burrs that "grab" hold of your clothing or a dog's coat. They are hijackers. Once they get attached to the cell of a living cell, they can take it over and "make" the living cell produce virus particles instead of cell parts. These parts can assemble into more viruses and then they break out of the cell (killing it) and begin the process again. They cannot make more viruses on their own.
Nonliving
dust is non-livingAdditional answerBut some dust consists of old skin cells (now dead, but were living) and pollen (living) spores (living).
Viruses are not an organism at all. They are not alive. They are nonliving. They are like cockle burrs that "grab" hold of your clothing or a dog’s coat. They are hijackers. Once they get attached to the cell of a living cell, they can take it over and "make" the living cell produce virus particles instead of cell parts. These particles can assemble into more viruses and then they break out of the cell (killing it) and begin the process again. They cannot make more viruses on their own.
Viruses, although the opinion on their non-living status may be changing.
They do not reproduce asexually or sexually. Viruses need a host like a cell in order to reproduce. In the dormant state, they are virions, and considered to be nonliving. However, in their active state, as viruses, they are considered to be living organisms.
They are Different because Viruses are nonliving.
Active (non-killed) viruses are living organisms.
Viruses are considered to be non-living things, and are capable of causing disease. The reason viruses are not considered living is because they lack many of the characteristics of life until they infect a host cell.
Viruses are considered to be non-living things, and are capable of causing disease. The reason viruses are not considered living is because they lack many of the characteristics of life until they infect a host cell.
A virus is considered non-living. It does not have all the characteristics of a living thing unlike bacteria. Viruses need living cells to reproduce while any living things can reproduce (asexually or not).
Living. Because viruses are caused by germs...which are living organisms
Hapyy birthday to you
Bacteria are considered to be living because they fulfill the requirements of the Cell Theory. Viruses, however, are generally classified as nonliving because they are not made of cells, they cannot reproduce independently, they generally do not react to noxious stimuli, etc.
They cannot live outside of a host.
we can