• About Us
  • Pricing
  • Discounts
  • Guarantees
  • ORDER
  • Testimonials
  • Free Essays
  • Sample essays
  • FAQ
  • Contacts
  • Support Live Chat
    Toll free
    Place an order

Viruses and Viral Processes Biomedical Scientists Critical Thinking

Mar 22, 2019 in Term Paper

Introduction

Science is the discipline that systematically builds and organizes knowledge. The knowledge gained depends on the explanations and predictions that affect people’s daily lives and wellbeing of the universe. Critical thinking is a field of study that equips learners with the ability to think clearly and incorporate rationality. Thus, critical thinking helps one to understand and have logical connections between different ideas. Moreover, science is related to philosophy since developing scientific facts depends on answering questions such as why, how, and when just to mention a few. Several years ago, science and philosophy of nature were used interchangeably; relationship still exists since the critique of science depends on critical thinkers. The societies are built on certain beliefs that are acquired either from science or religion. Critical thinkers in the society are vital since they help to reshape people’s beliefs. The current paper seeks to illustrate that there exists a relationship between people’s beliefs on viruses and viral processes, and critical thinkers have a role to play towards such beliefs.

Biomedical Scientists Critical Thinking Examples

Science has presented many facts regarding the universe such as viruses and viral processes, laws of gravity, and mathematical concepts among others. However, a fact in science results in creation of another question. (1) From this gap, critical thinking has been adopted and incorporated to critique and answering questions that science has been unable to handle. The analysis of these issues leads to people’s area of concern. Viruses and viral processes have been an area of focus in the bio medics. Some diseases have been attributed to be caused by viruses. However, the existence and nature of these viruses have not been explained in science. Therefore, it calls for philosophers and critical thinkers to make an in-depth analysis of virus and viral in order to solve issues that science could not handle. (2) There is necessity to analyze the argument that contrary to popular beliefs, science is more about questions than it is about facts and answers in using the concepts of viruses and viral processes.

The best point to start is by critiquing some definitions of viruses as presented by scientists. Medics define virus as a parasite that must infect a living cell to reproduce. They proceed to argue that though viruses share several features with living organisms, for instance, the possess-genetic materials such as RNA and DNA, they are not considered as living things. Medics argue that similar to other organisms that contain vital structures fundamental for growth and reproduction, viruses contain one cell contrary to other living organisms which bodies are made up of multiple cells. Viruses contain an outer coat, a capsid, which in some cases possesses genome and a few enzymes. (3) All these particles together make a virion responsible for causing human diseases such as AIDS, Ebola fever, influenza, or common cold among others. A virus not only results in diseases but also exists in the infected plants, animals, fungi, and bacteria.

It is crucial to embark on analyzing arguments concerning viruses and viral processes that exist in the real world. Biomedical scientists argue that viruses have the same cells as other living organisms though they are not considered as such. They also reproduce; and the question is how that is possible. In this case, science uses a concept that helps them to reveal that viruses are responsible for causing diseases and to create a question to be answered by the audience. The question is how it is possible for viruses to reproduce when not being perceived as living things. In this case one understands that critical thinkers are skeptical since they are able to analyze some areas where science cannot offer solutions. (4) Therefore, according to critical thinkers, there is no way a virus can reproduce and contain cell though it does not possess life. Thus, critical thinkers are the predecessors of some scientific inventions.

Biomedical scientists also distinguish virus from other free-living microbes. They argue that virus cannot be classified in the same group with small living organisms such as fungi and bacteria. (5) They attribute this to its small size and relatively simple structure. From this scenario, scientists are using body size to classify viruses and distinguish them from fungi and bacteria. Therefore, issue should be explained concerning the reason scientists classify bacteria in different groups with fungi and bacteria yet all are responsible for causing diseases. Though viruses have a diameter of approximately twenty five nanometers, they cannot be classified in the same group with bacteria that have a diameter of one thousand nanometers whereas the two organisms have similar impacts on other living things. (6) This has greatly influenced human understanding and beliefs regarding the classification of viruses and their size.

Moreover, scientists and biomedical doctors have demonstrated ignorance in handling some viruses that they claim to know and can handle treatment of diseases emanating from them. A good example of such a virus is the Filoviridae, which is the only known virus family. Biomedical scientists have displayed profound ignorance towards what this virus can do in the society. That witnesses that science has proved to be ineffective in some of its findings since according to this case, it creates more questions about Filoviridae virus rather than solutions. (7) The issues created have great impact on people’s beliefs regarding Filoviridae virus and its effects on health. According to critical thinkers, scientists do not provide enough understanding and maintenance of strategies that should be employed in nurturing the agents of Filoviridae. Therefore, it can be realized that scientists and biomedical doctors know less about the viral diseases resulting from this virus, detailed virology, and their pathogenesis. (8) In this case, it is evident that critical thinking embarks on gathering information that will assist biomedical scientists to gather fundamental information regarding filoviruses. Thus, critical thinking proves its worthiness in answering question that emanates from scientific facts and hence altering human beliefs.

According to an article of virus significance, scientists have in different ways analyzed Bcl-virus. However, their analysis leaves unanswered questions. (9) Biomedical scientists encoded a Bcl-2 homology virus. They associate it with herpes virus (KSHV) and argue that it blocks autophagy and apoptosis pathways. They also claim that vBcl-2 is fundamental for lytic replication of KSHV. (10) On the other hand, it can be noted that scientists have not revealed the distinction between the two and the way their combined attack can impact the human being. Surprisingly, they did not analyze the function of vBcl-2 in KSHV lytic reproduction and whether it is distinguishable genetically from other antiautophagic and antiapoptotic properties. (11) Through critical thinking, it is worth noting that KSHV and vBcl-2 can have supplementary governing functions that can be acted upon during their infectious life cycle. Due to this argument, it is evident that biomedical scientists endeavor to identify the various types of bacteria; however, they do not elucidate their relation to each other. Additionally, the regulation functions involved during the infection life cycle are not invented. (12) Thus, one can ominously notice that science has created questions in their findings, and critical thinking helps in analyzing them and providing solid answers.

The research of biomedical scientists in the field of virion and virus cannot be underestimated. The work of critical thinkers has embarked in filling the gaps left by scientists. The relationship has been a step stone to future research and wellbeing of the society. (13) The claim is affirmed by the research on human papillomavirus-16 oncorprotein expression and how it is monitored through cellular splicing factor by the label, SRSF2. Critical thinkers have opened a door for future research since it identifies some questions that were left unsatisfied. The increase in levels of viral E6 and E7 oncorproteins has been revealed to control human papillomavirus-associated tumor progression. It has been identified that cervical tumor cells E7 and E6 are controlled by cellular splicing SRSF2. It is therefore evident that SRSF2 is used to stabilize the RNAs, which encode these proteins. Furthermore, other SRSF related proteins such as SRSF2 have been noted to display growth that promotes these properties. (14) However, biomedical scientists argue that their work has been vital in discovering the new antiviral therapies. The drug proposed should incorporate kinases that regulate SR proteins. One can identify that the scientific work has been able to research the nature of SRSF virus; however, it creates more questions since they argue that it provokes for more research in order to develop new antiviral therapies. If science was effective enough, rather than presenting questions, it ought to present facts and provide inclusive explanations.

Furthermore, Bluetongue is a disease that is caused by bluetongue virus (BTV). Scientists state that it is one of the infectious illnesses of ruminants. The disease has significantly been variable in its early clinical manifestation. (15) However, scientists claim that most medical practitioners have demonstrated poor understanding and handling of its virulence and molecular determinants of BTV. It has been revealed that BTV8 virulence has established attributes such as multigenism and mutations of genomic segments and can result into attenuation in vivo. Biomedical scientists identified that pathogens VPI, VP5, VP4, and VP6 are primarily determined by VP2 and NS3. (20) In this case, critical thinking has played a crucial role in noticing that though the scientists have taken an important part in identifying the correlation between the disease and the virus, the BTV virulence is poorly understood. (16) Some questions emanate from this scenario; for example, the reason why the disease and behavior of the virus are poorly understood. Instead of science offering research that presents full understanding of the situation, they develop the one that leaves gaps. It therefore calls for critical thinkers to analyze the situation. Despite of what people understand about this virus, critical thinking views that more research should be conducted to enhance proper understanding of this virus.

Science has also created different perspective in people on the way they view the virus. This is indicated on the way the science research has impacted on people’s attributes towards Dengue virus evolution under a host targeted antiviral. (17) Science claims that antiviral agents that target host enzymes should ensure that there is minimal selection of escape. However, they do not offer variable reasons as to why this should be done. Due to critiques from critics, scientists have verified into details why there should be minimal selection of escape mutants. Critics enhanced scientists to relate pressure required for cellular mechanism. From this dimension of thought, it was later found that exertion of pressure into the host enzymes is not recommended. (18) Thus, pressure should not be directly exerted on the virus; it should be wielded on cellular mechanism that is purposely used during contamination.

Cancer’s impacts have been devastating the society and the globe at large. Scientists have been conducting research time after time, but it has been creating more question than answers. The questions answered thereafter arise from the analysis of the critics. The reason for that is the dynamic nature of oncolytic virus that is responsible for causing cancer. (19) Actually, scientists have not been able to answer the question of the dynamic nature of the oncolytic viruses. Critics notice that individual cancer cell is dynamic to oncolytic viruses. The same phenomenon was noticed even when it was emanating from the identical tissue type. Critical thinking has influenced people’s beliefs in explaining the relationship between VSV sensitivity and VSV resistant in prostate cancer. The research conducted thereafter proved that VSV is sensitive and VSV is resistance in prostate cancer. (20) Moreover, the proportion of sensitive resistance cell often changes during tumor development. Therefore, critics have played a very important role in changing people beliefs.

Another common virus is HIV. Since it was discovered, people had different beliefs regarding it. However, critical thinkers have helped scientists and the globe to understand the virus well. The globe at different periods of time conceived perception regarding its origin its treatment and the way it is spread among other. (21) However, critics presented questions arising from the scientist’s research. Due to their pressure, scientists researched and invented theories explaining the origin of HIV. The first theory claims that HIV virus originated from a monkey in Congo. Human being acquired the virus since he was feeding on meat from monkeys. The virus was later spread to other parts of the world through sexual intercourse, blood transfusion, and other means. The scientists also classified the virus into HIV-1 and HIV-2. (22) Therefore, critical thinkers have significantly contributed to people’s beliefs. It is also correct to recall that whatever has origin and beginning must have an end. Though scientists invented the theories explaining the beginning of the HIV, they should also be able to find the cure of the virus. Thus, critical thinking has enabled biomedical scientists to explore ARV. However, the question of its cure presented by critical thinkers remains unanswered. (23) People’s beliefs that HIV is a killer disease has been erased since they can live for a long time even though they are infected by the virus.

Conclusion

In conclusion, it is evident that scientists have performed the research that has resulted in the transformation of the world. However, this could not be achieved if there were not the critiques. Critics have significantly influenced people’s beliefs regarding viruses and viral processes. The society endorsed different beliefs on the way virus behaves, its transmission from one person to another, and its treatment. The researchers may be not comprehensive enough to cover the issue of virus and viral processes. The reason is that they have left unsolved issues creating malicious, unsatisfying, and questionable beliefs. Critical thinking therefore embarks in criticizing scientific and biomedical research to change people’s beliefs concerning viruses and viral processes. Critical thinkers have enabled the society to change their mere persuasions. The society is now build on credible beliefs regarding the origin and treatment of viruses that affect humans, animals, and plants. Therefore, critical thinking is an important tool for shaping people’s beliefs which should be embraced in order for humans to impart proper convictions in the society.

Related essays