The Hot Zone by Richard Preston

Question

The author describes the Ebola Virus as being neither dead nor alive. Provide evidence

to support and explain both sides of the argument, and then further explain the author’s

possible purpose for focusing on hot viruses. What were his intentions?

Answer 1

Are viruses alive or dead? You could make arguments for both! A virus is essentially a ball of DNA. It needs a host in order to be able to replicate, make more of itself, and spread to other hosts. The virus itself does not have the machinery necessary to replicate and make more virus; in that sense, a virus is dead. It can't replicate or have any effect without a host. However, once the virus has infiltrated a host, it will replicate, spread to other cells in the body, and spread to other hosts via a variety of transmission methods. While some viruses are relatively harmless, other viruses cause disease. In that sense-- that the virus replicates, is transmitted between hosts, and affects the host-- the virus is alive.

There are hundreds of thousands of viruses in the world! In fact, you have a significant amount of viral DNA in your body right now. The vast majority of that viral DNA is not harmful to you. In fact, there are some viruses that can be helpful to you!

However, the author of "The Hot Zone" wants to focus on some of the most harmful viruses: hot viruses, which rapidly replicate and amplify the number of viral copies present in the body. By focusing on some of the most dangerous viruses, the author is able to draw attention to the destruction that some viruses can have on the human body and on communities where the virus spreads. He wants to demonstrate that more attention, resources, and research are needed to help counteract the deadly effects of hot viruses, such as Ebola. He chooses to focus on some of the most devastating viruses in order to effectively demonstrate that more work is needed to understand, counteract, and cure viral infections.