-

>> That is all my point ,i suggest that inside and
>> outside are the same . they
>> are 2 sides of the same coin , a reflection of each
>> other .
>
>I would prefer to think of them as different coins
>with different denominations. They are still both
>coins - they can be used together in some transactions
>(synergistic thinking), but not in other transactions
>(critical thinking).
>
>>  viruses are the product of the cell they don't have
>> a life of their own.
>
>Hmmm? Certain viruses can survive indefinitely without
>a "host".

They can't reproduce,  been active on their own ,they need to be integrated
in a living organism to just have any effect.

>You're proposing that the virus is merely a messenger
>between cells? That it "carries" genetic information
>(DNA) from one cell to another -

exactely ! just a genetic material  which don't have any expression on its
own .
Combined to the genetic material of the cell,  the cell can perform a
function that it was not programmed to do .

a microscopic FedEx
>system?

i don't now what it is !

Do you think the new cell receives and then
>incorporates the DNA into itself? (I'm not familiar
>with this theory).

you can start with this proposition

A NEW THEORETICAL MODEL OF VIRAL PHENOMENA
http://www.geocities.com/HotSprings/Spa/5976/virus.html

at least in part the same way that an information can change slightly your
way of thinking or change your life forever.


>I think you're saying that the virus is a "tool" used
>by (nature? evolution? god?) to enforce natural
>selection within a species? An evolutionary referee?

It makes sens to me  that viruses are agent of evolution   and  some
researchs suggest that too .
Now,  you can't stop yourself seing life as a power struggle ( enforce
,referree)


>
>> what i want to say is that there is no such thing as
>> "disease " organisms ,
>> the disease is  in the RELATIONSHIP  between the 2
>> entities,  the <snip>
>
>So, one week the ebola virus may be my friend, and the
>next week it is my enemy? I'm sorry, to me that is a
>far too chaotic view of the universe. Taken to an
>extreme it would mean that the "friendly" bacteria
>inside me could "turn against me" at any time?

healthy carriers of viruses and bacterias and parasites have been recognised
to the point that it might be more the norm and the symtomatic
manifestations the exceptions.
and yes even water can become toxic when taken in excess or taken the wrong
way . each element in nature have its place , its time , and its quantity.

I understand that it seems chaotic anf frightning that , may be , we can't
CONTROL what is going on .
It is more reassuring when we can point the finger to the culprit , the
cause of our inconfort fears and  loss of control .
>
.
>
>Sometimes one does not "choose" a relationship of
>rivalry - it is thrust upon one. If a wild animal
>attacks me because I have wandered into its territory
>I am forced to react to it. I do not have to consider
>it a "rival" - I may simply choose to avoid it in the
>future.

The fact is that wild animals don't attack very often  except when they
sense rivalry  or fear from humans . I have approached black bears as close
than 10 meters in the wild whithout any signs of agressivity from neither it
or i .
I concede that a grizzly , at a certain time of the year  when hungry might
choose to makes a meal from me . I might be even glad to died that way but
that is an other story.
>
>> and in that kind of relatonship i guarantee you that
>> the virus the bacterias
>> will have the last word in front of more elaborate
>> forms of life
>
>If that were truly the case, then I don't think the
>more elaborate forms of life would ever develop.

In the stuggle for life conception i can see but ,
 if you see the elaborate forms of life as the result of the cooperations of
unicellular beings ( even one cell is allready a cooperation of the
mitochondria and the cell it self ) it might be
 That is a more fragile position than being a bacteria that can reproduce so
quickly  and adjust so easely to new condition

>> inapropriate to transmit what i have to say may be i
>> should send a virus
>
>My anti-virus software won't allow that :)

i see that you are well protected

Taste that sentence : <in my defencelessness, my safety lies!>
jean-claude