Immunity to viral diseases - Question

  • Thread starter Thread starter JLol
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
Immunity to viral diseases primarily results from the use of vaccines, which introduce a marker for the pathogen, allowing the body to recognize and respond to it. Antibiotics are ineffective against viruses as they target bacteria directly, while antiviral drugs inhibit viral replication rather than confer immunity. The smallpox vaccine is cited as a key example of a successful viral vaccine. The discussion hints at the possibility of the question being a homework assignment, prompting participants to encourage independent learning. Overall, the focus remains on the distinction between vaccines and other treatments in relation to viral immunity.
JLol
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
So there's this question that has me stuck: The only immunity to viral diseases result from the use of _____. I'm guessing that it's either antibiotics or vaccines, but I'm starting to have doubts. Are my choices correct or should I find another word for the blank?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Antibiotics only work for bacteria and do not confer immunity, they simply aim to destroy the bacteria directly. The equivalent for viruses are antiviral drugs however these often aim at inhibiting the replication of viruses (e.g. interferon) rather than attacking the virus directly.

Vaccines confer immunity by introducing a marker for the pathogen into the body so that it can recognise it, the first and best example of a vaccine for a virus is the smallpox vaccine.
 
Homework question? If it is, you should just point them in the right direction Ryan. Students learn more when figuring it out on their own :)
 
bobze said:
Homework question? If it is, you should just point them in the right direction Ryan. Students learn more when figuring it out on their own :)

Very true! I didn't realize it was I'm afraid.
 
ryan_m_b said:
Very true! I didn't realize it was I'm afraid.

Don't worry people sneak them in trying to wrap up procrastinated projects and not willing to take the time to actually learn their material. I've answered them before too! :wink:
 
The fact that it was posted in the biology section tricked me! I'll be more wary of students from now on :-p
 
Thread 'Confusion regarding a chemical kinetics problem'
TL;DR Summary: cannot find out error in solution proposed. [![question with rate laws][1]][1] Now the rate law for the reaction (i.e reaction rate) can be written as: $$ R= k[N_2O_5] $$ my main question is, WHAT is this reaction equal to? what I mean here is, whether $$k[N_2O_5]= -d[N_2O_5]/dt$$ or is it $$k[N_2O_5]= -1/2 \frac{d}{dt} [N_2O_5] $$ ? The latter seems to be more apt, as the reaction rate must be -1/2 (disappearance rate of N2O5), which adheres to the stoichiometry of the...
I don't get how to argue it. i can prove: evolution is the ability to adapt, whether it's progression or regression from some point of view, so if evolution is not constant then animal generations couldn`t stay alive for a big amount of time because when climate is changing this generations die. but they dont. so evolution is constant. but its not an argument, right? how to fing arguments when i only prove it.. analytically, i guess it called that (this is indirectly related to biology, im...
Back
Top