Virus vs Bacteria

Considering the deadliest varieties of each:

• Who would win in a battle?
• Who could kill a human first?
• Who could destroy all other life on Earth first?

Viruses stomp. Too versatile, bacteria can be inhibited by a number of things, viruses just adapt and evolve past said inhibitors.

@eisenfauste: good points.

Virus curbs

Virus, the human body is composed of a huge number of benevolent bacteria. While occasionally the wrong kinds of bacteria can be deadly to humans, I don't recall any of them being able to kill the amount of people certain viruses are.

Virus all three rounds.

You don't know what Viruses do to Bacteria,right?

Viruses are species specific. Viruses that affect humans are entirely harmless to bacteria.

That being said there are more bacteriophagic viruses than there are virophagic bacteria that microbiology knows of.

Prions stomp both rite?

No way.

Depends. Some Bacteria can become immune/resistant to certain Bacteriophages. Kind of a stalemate for round 1. They can also become resistant to diseases. And Bacteria have quite a few advantages of their own. Bacteria do not actually need a host to survive and can live in a variety of environments unlike viruses, which must have some kind of host. Not only this, but bacteria. Bacteria can live and reproduces on the moon and other environments, etc...yadayada,

This can go many ways. Even outright stalemate. But 1 and 2 to Bacteria and 3 to Viruses maybe? This thread is a bit ridiculous. I don't either is "better" then the other. Chemistry balances everything. These aren't comicbooks. But I'm gonna sit back and watch people pitch feats and stuff.

Who knows? Maybe this thread can become educational. Imagine that. People researching bacteria and viruses and pitching around real facts. Comicvine...educational.....

Virus stomps in a direct confrontation. They (bacteriophages) can infect bacteria, but bacteria can't infect viruses.

In other battles, the victor is more difficult to determine. Bacteria have their own advantages, such as not relying on hosts to be active and being able reproduce outside of hosts, and so on, so it could probably go to the bacteria in some rounds, but more often than not, team 1 would win, simply because viruses can infect all known life, whereas bacteria cannot infect viruses.

Virus slaughters. There is no known way to kill a virus.

Bacteria do it all the time.

*Lights it on fire*

*Leaves it with no more hosts, starving it*

@draciosv: @thanofleeze:

Still no. Viruses have some properties of organisms but do not qualify as one because they rely on host cells. Therefore it is neither alive nor an object. You can't kill something that isn't life.

@mandarinestro: You can destroy it.

Virus.

Regina Phalange.

That is all.

Virus

Too much science in this thread, NERDS!!!!!!!

Immune system of the bacteria against the bacteriophages: read the recent papers about the CRISPR system.

Yersinia pestis killed 25-33% of the human race, no virus ever came close to that.

Virus like Ebola are not a real threat for the human race taken as a whole because it killed its hist too fast.

Yes, there are ten times more bacteria than human cells in our body and without our microbiota, we will be more susceptible to a lot of diseases, but in parallel, more than 10% of our genome is made of virus that have integrated our DNA.

Some virus (see papers on Mimivirus) are bigger than most of the bacteria.

Tuberculosis XDR (resistant to all known antibiotics) is more and more prevalent, with an incidence of the disease much much higher than HIV.

I'm writing on my phone right now, so I won't emphasize any of all that, but in summary: pathogenic bacteria are much more evolved and dangerous than the virus, and I would gladly welcome any challenge to this affirmation (but ne careful with your arguments, I have been studying and teaching clinical microbiology and bacterial pathogenesis since last century...)

Bacteria may be more efficient in some ways, as I did point out earlier, but they still won't win the round against the virus due to lacking the capacity to affect them.

That, and there appears to be new research indicating countless small viruses could be influencing the weather and such phenomena.

I don't know about this. What sources are there for this?

There are, however, virucides, some of which are based on bacteria.