The controversy over whether viruses are truly alive stems from their unique characteristics that blur the line between living and non-living entities. Viruses cannot replicate or carry out metabolic processes on their own; they require a host cell to reproduce and function. Additionally, they lack cellular structures and do not exhibit traits commonly associated with life, such as growth and response to stimuli. This has led to debates among scientists regarding their classification, with some viewing them as complex biological entities and others as mere biochemical particles.
There is a lot of debate over whether a virus is truly alive; however, in general, a single virus is generally referred to as a particle rather than a cell.
There is some debate on the issue of whether a virus is truly alive, or is instead just a kind of self-replicating poison. Purified virus can be prepared in the form of a crystal, that looks just like salt. A virus has absolutely no biological activity or metabolism unless it is inside a cell of some other organism. On its own it is an inert chemical. But then, viruses do reproduce, which seems to be a uniquely biological activity. So, it is a bit ambiguous. Personally I believe that viruses are not actually alive.
The debate is not about whether viruses are alive or dead. Rather, there is debate about whether a virus should be considered a living thing. Viruses are not like living cells, because they do not have metabolic processes, and they cannot reproduce themselves. Instead, they invade a host cell, and the virus's genes cause the host cell to produce new viruses. However, the question of whether this "counts" as being alive is a semantic one. Viruses have some properties of living things, and they lack other properties, so the question of whether they are "alive" comes down to one's definition of the word "life."
It's a virus. It's alive.
A virus does not fulfill all requirements for life, eg. no reproduction through meiosis or mitosis
Neither. A virus is not really alive in a traditional sense.
No.
A pathogenic bacterium is alive while a virus is not.
No: Mumps is a virus, and by definition viruses are nonliving, neither dead or alive.
It is a virus and not alive but if blood or any body fluids are in the soil, someone who touches the contaminated soil can get the virus.
They are not classified into a kingdom as they are not alive.
Viruses has a charateristics of being alive but they are NOT since they are single-cell organisms.