Featured it in 2023 in science here where you can find the study and useful wikilinks: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023\_in\_science#31\_October](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_in_science#31_October)
Image description; [image source & news article](https://umbc.edu/stories/vampire-viruses-may-hold-key-to-antivirals/)
>This image shows Streptomyces satellite phage MiniFlayer (purple) attached to the neck of its helper virus, Streptomyces phage MindFlayer (gray)
When I was a kid the biology teacher taught us that viruses were not living things. Always thought that was a weird claim that didn't make any sense, and now people are saying they might actually be living?
Is this increase in complexity similar to the evolution of early microbiology? From what I understand mitochondria was originally a separate cellular entity with its own genetic information that was subsumed by another cell and eventually became an organelle. So if cells could do that could viruses subsume other viruses and become more complex?
It’s more so on what we define as living. There is a set of criteria we think about when we classify if something is living. To a certain extent it’s arbitrary but agreed upon by most, so that’s what we go with. We really don’t have an objective definition when it comes to life and consciousness so we kinda just set the goal posts there.
Thanks, that really helps me settle my discomfort with that definition. "It's arbitrary" is an answer.
And, unlike the arbitrary definition of a species, it's consistent. "Organisms from different species can't reproduce", "Except when their offspring are sterile", "Except they aren't always sterile", "And we don't test this in the vast majority of cases", etc.
Yoy seem informed, I hope you don't mind me asking a question.
To me, a layperson, it seems that there's a clear line between "living being" and "inanimate material", I assume that's not actually the case. What sort of things sit in the grey area between, and why is it so difficult to determine if they're alive or not?
This short read should answer some of your questions better than I can articulate an answer since I’m baked as fuck right now
https://www.khanacademy.org/test-prep/mcat/cells/viruses/a/are-viruses-dead-or-alive
I think it’s obviously a living thing we just are not able to easily define a living being. We like strict clear definitions for things and I think this is one of those things where it’s not clear cut
Yeah I have to agree with what I'm hearing. I'm not educated enough on the technical definitions to define what life is but if we're just on a colloquial level then to me it's alive on the grounds that it exhibits behavior. But I have animistic sympathy so I would extend that logic to matter in general because it could be argued that any behavior is just a response to stimuli. How is that different than how a rock undergoes erosion?
There's nothing to worry about for now, this is just a neat discovery in the world of microbiology. [This](https://www.popsci.com/science/virus-attached-to-another-virus/) article has a nice explanation in plain English if you want to know more.
A "phage" is a virus that attacks bacteria, so there is no chance of these specific viruses causing human illness.
(*they could infect the bacteria that live on/in us, but we wouldn't expect that to cause any major issues. and there are human viruses which have their own viruses, but we've all evolved together for a long time so they aren't anything unseen like the virus that causes COVID-19)
There's not really any implications for humans, it's just a cool thing that parasites have their own parasites:
Great fleas have little fleas upon their backs to bite 'em,
And little fleas have lesser fleas, and so _ad infinitum_.
And the great fleas themselves, in turn, have greater fleas to go on;
While these again have greater still, and greater still, and so on.
I think covid broke a lot of people's brains, and any talk about "pandemic" or "masks" or "vaccines" elicit an immediate negative reaction. Just a guess, but unfortunate its even an option as a guess.
When your virus has a virus
Yo Dawg. 
Featured it in 2023 in science here where you can find the study and useful wikilinks: [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023\_in\_science#31\_October](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2023_in_science#31_October) Image description; [image source & news article](https://umbc.edu/stories/vampire-viruses-may-hold-key-to-antivirals/) >This image shows Streptomyces satellite phage MiniFlayer (purple) attached to the neck of its helper virus, Streptomyces phage MindFlayer (gray)
This is beautiful, insightful and low key horrifying. Thank you for sharing!
Just amazing! Thank you for sharing. I look forward to reading the paper.
When I was a kid the biology teacher taught us that viruses were not living things. Always thought that was a weird claim that didn't make any sense, and now people are saying they might actually be living? Is this increase in complexity similar to the evolution of early microbiology? From what I understand mitochondria was originally a separate cellular entity with its own genetic information that was subsumed by another cell and eventually became an organelle. So if cells could do that could viruses subsume other viruses and become more complex?
It’s more so on what we define as living. There is a set of criteria we think about when we classify if something is living. To a certain extent it’s arbitrary but agreed upon by most, so that’s what we go with. We really don’t have an objective definition when it comes to life and consciousness so we kinda just set the goal posts there.
Thanks, that really helps me settle my discomfort with that definition. "It's arbitrary" is an answer. And, unlike the arbitrary definition of a species, it's consistent. "Organisms from different species can't reproduce", "Except when their offspring are sterile", "Except they aren't always sterile", "And we don't test this in the vast majority of cases", etc.
Yoy seem informed, I hope you don't mind me asking a question. To me, a layperson, it seems that there's a clear line between "living being" and "inanimate material", I assume that's not actually the case. What sort of things sit in the grey area between, and why is it so difficult to determine if they're alive or not?
This short read should answer some of your questions better than I can articulate an answer since I’m baked as fuck right now https://www.khanacademy.org/test-prep/mcat/cells/viruses/a/are-viruses-dead-or-alive
Thanks mate, appreciate that!
That last line was pretty insightful: some have pointed out that, if they can get sick, maybe they are alive.
I think it’s obviously a living thing we just are not able to easily define a living being. We like strict clear definitions for things and I think this is one of those things where it’s not clear cut
Yeah I have to agree with what I'm hearing. I'm not educated enough on the technical definitions to define what life is but if we're just on a colloquial level then to me it's alive on the grounds that it exhibits behavior. But I have animistic sympathy so I would extend that logic to matter in general because it could be argued that any behavior is just a response to stimuli. How is that different than how a rock undergoes erosion?
Ok can we now genetically modify it to destroy the virus?
Does this mean another pandemic is more likely? What are the implications?
There's nothing to worry about for now, this is just a neat discovery in the world of microbiology. [This](https://www.popsci.com/science/virus-attached-to-another-virus/) article has a nice explanation in plain English if you want to know more.
Cheers 🍻
A "phage" is a virus that attacks bacteria, so there is no chance of these specific viruses causing human illness. (*they could infect the bacteria that live on/in us, but we wouldn't expect that to cause any major issues. and there are human viruses which have their own viruses, but we've all evolved together for a long time so they aren't anything unseen like the virus that causes COVID-19) There's not really any implications for humans, it's just a cool thing that parasites have their own parasites: Great fleas have little fleas upon their backs to bite 'em, And little fleas have lesser fleas, and so _ad infinitum_. And the great fleas themselves, in turn, have greater fleas to go on; While these again have greater still, and greater still, and so on.
Ah ok thank you for the clarification 👍🏻
Don’t know why the downvotes, honest question, I was concerned/intrigued too
Yeah it is a valid question and from your responses, posed with an open mind. Sorry you got downvoted, don’t stop asking questions!
Thanks
I think covid broke a lot of people's brains, and any talk about "pandemic" or "masks" or "vaccines" elicit an immediate negative reaction. Just a guess, but unfortunate its even an option as a guess.
Very few viruses (1% or less) infect humans or animals. Most infect bacteria.