viruses aren't parasites?

part two-b: a short detour before getting back on course

A simple false story is better than a complex true one, and with enough faith, maybe we can force the simple story to be true.

- John Hayward

part one . . . part two

here we address another caveat to our working definition of a virus.

captain steve nominated teammate jeff green to school one of the bobs about the existence of viruses. but let’s take a closer look at jeff’s definition to see if they’re arguing about the same thing.

jeff green is of the opinion that our own cells intelligently create viruses in order to dissolve toxins, like an enzyme. human and other animal cells create viruses and so do plant cells and bacteria. he knows these things through, “scientific inductive reasoning.” you can find his description here.

he further states that researchers are able to produce viruses (SARS-CoV2, H1N1 flu, ebola) in a lab that never occur in nature by introducing a specific range of toxins to animal cells, causing the cells to produce their own viral protein. he calls this a “proxy virus” that we can isolate, sequence, and look at under microscopy.

jeff green is definitely on team virus because he assures us viruses are real and have been proven to exist, but he disagrees they are parasites. he has a lot more to say about the existence of viruses so we’ll have to check back in with jeff later.

does captain steve agree or disagree with jeff’s alternate definition? i can’t tell from his posts (unless I missed it). however, not everyone on team virus agrees with jeff, otherwise the “official” sources would reflect this.

going forward, we will acknowledge that not everyone on team virus agrees 100% with our working definition, but we’ll continue to use it as it is not only widely accepted, but also what the bobs are specifically objecting to. what do you think?

part three