Note the common cold, I'm aware that viruses do mutate rapidly, though, thats not the reason why they are incurable.

They are incurable because they aren't actually alive. You require 5 things to be alive, transpiration, respiration, reproduction, eating and excreting... A virus only reproduces so at the moment, everything that people throw at viruses is to stop them reproducing.

However, that is the plan for curing a virus. If they are mutating, the genetic sequencing in their coils of DNA that float around within the stupid procaryotic cell would have to be similar. Thus, there would have to be a common polypeptide/neucleotide that would be susceptible to something that we can throw at it.

Besides, if you do have your masters/honours in whatever, then you would realise that you can't define what a healthy human being is (as you attempted to do so in your post!) as health is dependant upon the person's normal state of being which may be what you would consider unhealthy.

The cure for the common cold would be fantastic, I know from personal experience that it takes up to 3 weeks to shake it, thats probably because I'm under a fair amount of stress with my HSC upcoming etc, I'd hate to think how stressful you would be with a mortgage to pay off, a family to take care of etc, etc. The stress making the immune system depressed so that the response time taken on your T-Cells and B-Cells is severely lacking - hence, when a NORMAL (not healthy) adult contracts the viral strain of the common cold, it can take months for them to shake it fully.

So, instead of trying to supress the reproduction of the virus, I think that if there was some way to break it down as well as neutralising the anti-gen it produces (even when it's dead) would be handy. If you look at the structure of the T-cell (m) and the phagocytes that neutralise the cold, you could work out how these critters kill it, I mean, the phagocyte engulfs it - then it just dies. So maybe, if you could look at the chemical reactions occuring as the phagocyte neutralises the virus before exctretion, you could somehow replicate that in the form of a tablet that would contain billions of T-Cell (m) that have been exposed to the common cold strand with a bunch of molecules or ionic structures that replicate what the phagocyte does.

Once the drug for the common cold is found, then you could just replicate the process with the other strands. If you are really intelligent then you could possibly predict future strands.

Theres a Thesis for your phD Take it before I start mine and I'll slit your throat lol.

Note the common cold, I'm aware that viruses do mutate rapidly, though, thats not the reason why they are incurable.

They are incurable because they aren't actually alive. You require 5 things to be alive, transpiration, respiration, reproduction, eating and excreting... A virus only reproduces so at the moment, everything that people throw at viruses is to stop them reproducing.

However, that is the plan for curing a virus. If they are mutating, the genetic sequencing in their coils of DNA that float around within the stupid procaryotic cell would have to be similar. Thus, there would have to be a common polypeptide/neucleotide that would be susceptible to something that we can throw at it.

Besides, if you do have your masters/honours in whatever, then you would realise that you can't define what a healthy human being is (as you attempted to do so in your post!) as health is dependant upon the person's normal state of being which may be what you would consider unhealthy.

The cure for the common cold would be fantastic, I know from personal experience that it takes up to 3 weeks to shake it, thats probably because I'm under a fair amount of stress with my HSC upcoming etc, I'd hate to think how stressful you would be with a mortgage to pay off, a family to take care of etc, etc. The stress making the immune system depressed so that the response time taken on your T-Cells and B-Cells is severely lacking - hence, when a NORMAL (not healthy) adult contracts the viral strain of the common cold, it can take months for them to shake it fully.

So, instead of trying to supress the reproduction of the virus, I think that if there was some way to break it down as well as neutralising the anti-gen it produces (even when it's dead) would be handy. If you look at the structure of the T-cell (m) and the phagocytes that neutralise the cold, you could work out how these critters kill it, I mean, the phagocyte engulfs it - then it just dies. So maybe, if you could look at the chemical reactions occuring as the phagocyte neutralises the virus before exctretion, you could somehow replicate that in the form of a tablet that would contain billions of T-Cell (m) that have been exposed to the common cold strand with a bunch of molecules or ionic structures that replicate what the phagocyte does.

Once the drug for the common cold is found, then you could just replicate the process with the other strands. If you are really intelligent then you could possibly predict future strands.

Theres a Thesis for your phD Take it before I start mine and I'll slit your throat lol.

All living things also respond and adapt to their environment. According to my last 11 years in school, something's scientifically not considered alive without that point.

Phagocytosis will usually involve some form of lysozymal enzyme that physically digests the viral and infected body cells

So humans are dead? You may not realise it, but humans don't adapt to their surroundings... the surroundings adapt to us, thats what sets humans apart from the rest of the hominoidea class that we belong to.

Also, in response to slip, finding a vaccine sounds as hopeless as finding a cure tbh. If you find the vaccine for a virus, then it just mutates rapidly.

I mean, there are already vaccines for them! Look at the influenza vaccine. I mean, influenza is a virus, yet we can vaccinate against it. As you say, the cold strain of virus mutates rapidly, hence, if you can find the vaccine it would have to be common to all, which would in turn lead to a rapid discovery of the cure for it. Hence, why bother with the vaccine when you have the cure?

BTW: Vaccinating against the cold could more than likely be easy enough. Find a non-virulent strain, pasteurise it or something else.



Why not simply inject the ezymes into the body? While it may not be a total cure, you could say it well and truly is if the body can kill it. It's like, recently, they injected billions of anti-bodies into a cancer patient, and he cured the cancer. Humans have a natural immunity to cancer, that is why the majority don't develop until later life (when your immune system starts going downhill).

Besides, there is a lot of ethnicity problems with finding the cure for cancer. I have my reasons for saying that I don't wish for the cure to be found. (I have lots of family members loose their lives to cancer, I myself am a high risk patient for it with a family case of bowel cancer).

TBH, while they are so close to the cure for cancer, after discovering that humans have a natural immunity to it, they just have to work out a few other things etc, etc. I have no idea about the research into cancer - so I can't say much more than that .

However, finding the cure for one virus, surely, able to replicate that to all viruses. I mean, Louis Pasteur did that with Rabies and Anthrax (That's what Robert Koch discovered wasn't it?). So why not do that with the common cold.

+ You are also talking about the developed countries average adult. What about those in 3rd world? Surely WHO would spend money to cover these people so that they can enjoy an increased life expectancy?

On that note, a cure for HIV/AIDs would be handy

Wow, you take what I said with environment adapting us too far. We don't change to the environment, one thing that you should learn even at year 11-12 biology. If you look at it, we will NEVER be a common ancestor as we don't experience environmental pressure - resulting in a continous stable equilibrium effect. The only way for animals to evolve is to have either environmental pressures or chemical pressures, which, humans don't experience either.
The environment does adapt to how we want it to - or rather, to rephrase what I posted earlier, we manipulate it. If it's hot, we find air conditioning to cool us down - thus, WE (humans) change the air temperature which is an abiotic feature of the environment we live in, thus, we changed the environment to suit us. We cooled it down, we change the environment, it conforms to how we want it to.

Vaccine and cures are not the same thing, as you stated. However, if you can find a way to make a virus non-virulent to humans, in the way of the vaccine by treating it chemically as they do with the pneumonia vaccines (and other bacterial ones), then surely you can apply that to a cure. Besides, vaccines don't always work. It is mandatory (in Australia anyway) to be vaccinated against Chicken Pox BEFORE you start school, however, plenty of school age kids still get Chicken Pox. The vaccine prevents it, but you are still susceptible to it - it just becomes less of a threat and more an annoyance, but damn, a cure would be hot wouldn't it?

And influenza is not the same as the common cold, I never suggested that, otherwise they wouldn't be called different things would they? Influenza is a virus though, as anyone could tell you using basic knowledge. Therefor, as it is a virus, it would carry a likeness, something in common with the common cold viral strain. Therefor, if you can find the cure for either, there would have to be a similarity that you could strike upon and find the universal cure for all viral cell make-ups.

There HAS to be something that is common to all, some part of the DNA sequencing would have to be the same! If there wasn't then they would all be completely differently structured and all the viruses, would no longer be viruses as they are classified genetically based on their cellular structure. Like, what seperates plants for animals? The cell wall and the chloroplasts within the cells, there is a genetic difference in the sequencing that tells one cell to make chloroplasts and one not to. They can't spontaneously generate as that was proven to be incorrect... a long time ago.

Why not pasteurise a vaccine? It's how the majority of them were made. The cure for small pox is a pasteruised version of the pathogen. Why not pasteurise a cold virus? You probably understand why not to, I haven't done any form of degree in this area - but I am aiming to do so in the future.

In answer to number 8, I would rather not make my view public as it's pretty Right Wing and confronting as to why I don't want the cure for cancer to be found. But you would have some idea as to ethical issues with biological studies, surely.. I mean, nearly everything we eat has been genetically modified in some way. I mean, every carrot that I've ever seen has been modified (carrots are naturally white for those that are reading but don't know). They were engineering orange some years back (can't give exact dates) to be orange..

Also, India is HARDLY a third world country. India would be pretty much fully developed, in consideration to the fact that it's one of the largest (must be able to support a high population) and it's economy is booming at the moment. India is NOT a 3rd world country in any degree of the sense.

A third world country is something like Ethiopia or Zimbabwe, which isn't REALLY a 3rd world country, but is bloody poor.

I'm also aware that cancer can occur at any age of life, hence the words USUALLY, which it is. If cancer could occur at anytime, then, why is it only a recent medical problem? Since the life expectancy has jumped dramatically over the years, from 45 being like super old, to 45 being mid - life in the space of about 100 years, cancer has only become a recent issue.
I'm not sure how closely you follow the cure for cancer research, but when, a Melanoma patient was injected with anti-bodies, they were able to fight of the cancer, they proclaimed that humans do have a natural immunity to cancer. While it may be a mRNA problem, humans don't have the structure to have it occur frequently. With Melanoma, it's to do with exposure to UV Rays which cause the mutation as it puts it under a pressure, I mean, the body has a resistance to it, not total immunity..

Regardless, if I could, the cure for the common cold and viruses would be my ultimate aim (to kinda bring it on topic)

As you keep telling me in my posts that I can't extrapolate... why not? Isn't that what research is about? Setting up a Hypothesis via extrapolating the data set that they have and then trying to prove or disprove it!

Look, by telling me that I can't extrapolate based on my current knowledge (you may forget that I'm only in year 12 at the moment) means that you could potentially not try it. Why not try and find the common structure of all viruses and then to extrapolate the evidence that you have? It's better than interpolating - which gets you nowhere in the end.

It's how Mendeleev did what he did, and look, he got 70% of his predictions correct - if I set up my thesis the way that tries to look at the similarities of viruses and how to exploit that to my advantage, then, one thing will get proven - either, I'm wrong, or I'm right.

You need to be open to suggestions on things like that, rather than just turn the suggestion down without trying.

Besides, maybe diseases are part of the human race and life in general. What happened when we can no longer die? Do we stop having children? Do we still retire at 65 and cause the working class to loose money as we are 140+ sitting at home sucking up resources from a dying economy?

The body physically cannot cope with work at age 100+, so what does that mean for the society that is over 100 but still have like another 100 years left? Or they are immortal? The earth will get trashed, we will loose the ability to make Di hydrogen Monoxide, causing life to cease..

Even if we did manage to terraform the moon, or Mars, where does that leave us? The ice they think they found on Mars is likely to be solid Ammonia - which, unfortunately is toxic to humans in large quantities.

That's one of my reasons against finding the cure for all diseases, diseases like Cancer obviously occur for a reason - without them, the human race becomes immortal which would results in its inevitable destruction.

Our bodies don't particularly wear down

maybe I should have reworded the post better.

In a situation of no disease, where every part of the body could be replaced because there would be no risk of infection/contamination, no risk of rejection by the body tissues.

Then the body wouldn't wear down

Make better sense?

BTW: Just picked up something in marc's post.. a few hundred centuries? Wow... several thousand years - It was only until the late 1800s early 1900s that 30 became roughly midlife. Though, during that time was industrialization so many people died at work

It's a typo, you've made them before too.