The debate over whether viruses are alive centers on their unique characteristics. Viruses possess genetic material (DNA or RNA) and can evolve through mutation and natural selection, suggesting a form of life. However, they lack cellular structures and cannot reproduce independently, requiring a host cell to replicate. Some argue that their ability to adapt and influence ecosystems indicates a level of life, while others maintain that their dependence on host cells disqualifies them from being considered truly alive.
Viruses are not alive in the first place, so no.
Biologists don't use binomial nomenclature to name viruses because binomial nomenclature is reserved for living things. Viruses are not considers alive.
Need a host.
No. Viruses are not cells. They invade cells to get the materials to copy their DNA. Many people do not consider viruses to be truly alive.
They form a capsid.
Viruses are not alive in the first place, so no.
Since viruses are not alive, they are not named by a genus or a species.
No, because viruses aren't alive.
-viruses and alive but bacteria is -viruses spread but dont multiply or change in your body, bacteria are alive and are often evolving -viruses cannot be treated, but bacteria can be eliminated with chemincals and anitbiotics
Certainly not. It is a hotly debated subject. Viruses (and prions for that matter) are not alive in a conventional sense.
bacteria is but for viruses some scientists believe they are alive and others think they dont so i can't give you an answer to that
Viruses are not an organism at all. They are not alive.
Since viruses are not alive they can not have life processes.
Viruses are not alive and so do not sleep. They can become inactive for a while.
Biologists don't use binomial nomenclature to name viruses because binomial nomenclature is reserved for living things. Viruses are not considers alive.
No, they are not alive at all.
They are not alive and therefore have no cells.