Are viruses living things?

Use this forum to discuss the philosophy of science. Philosophy of science deals with the assumptions, foundations, and implications of science.
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Are viruses living things?

Post by Steve3007 »

Perhaps the covid-19 outbreak is another opportunity to talk about whether there is an objectively existing dividing line between a piece of complex chemistry and a living thing. At what level of complexity do we declare "here is life"? If an allegedly living thing is so small that we can see the individual atoms of which it is composed and create computer models of the chemical reactions that constitute it going about its daily business, is it alive?

Here's a lovely 3D rendering of a covid-19 virus injecting its genetic material into something, as many of us have no doubt done ourselves:
https://sketchfab.com/3d-models/coronav ... 13a43fa974
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 14992
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: Are viruses living things?

Post by Sy Borg »

Love the interactive #D model!

What do you think, Steve?

I consider them to be alive because "infectious agent" is just a bespoke term to cover outliers like viruses and prions. There are many obligate parasites that require hosts to reproduce, so I don't begrudge them living status for that.

Viruses are different to other life in that they don't eat and are utterly unresponsive, until they land on a cell. Thus, some people describe them as "bad code". But does "bad code" evolve over billions of years, woven so closely into the fabric of life that they form critical parts of every eukaryote's microbiome and genetics? Seems like pretty good code to me.

Then again, I have long complained about the coupling of "biology" and "life". I see planets as being alive too - certainly the Earth is - and what we refer to as "life" is simply be the biological component of a living planet with active volcanism and water.

A side note, my favourite virus is the bacteriophage. How can you help but love a microorganism that lands on (often harmful) bacteria into which it injects the contents of its "head", which is (was) filled with DNA? https://imgur.com/gallery/m1veQla/comment/1347816287. Having little legs and a head shaped like an icosohedron are also endearing traits.
Steve3007
Posts: 10339
Joined: June 15th, 2011, 5:53 pm

Re: Are viruses living things?

Post by Steve3007 »

Greta wrote:I consider them to be alive because "infectious agent" is just a bespoke term to cover outliers like viruses and prions. There are many obligate parasites that require hosts to reproduce, so I don't begrudge them living status for that.

Viruses are different to other life in that they don't eat and are utterly unresponsive, until they land on a cell. Thus, some people describe them as "bad code". But does "bad code" evolve over billions of years, woven so closely into the fabric of life that they form critical parts of every eukaryote's microbiome and genetics? Seems like pretty good code to me.
I guess it depends how we're using the word "bad". Obviously it would be absurd to use it in the value judgement sense of the word.

We're all taught in high school Biology lessons that there are 7 (I think it's 7. These things usually seem to come in 7's) characteristics that define life, one of which is reproduction. So I suppose a thing which contains genetic material (DNA or RNA) and is capable of reproducing and thereby spreading it can be called life, even if it lacks some of the other 6.

The "bad code" thing is interesting, given that, while locked down in my house, I'm currently updating a set of C++ software coding standards for the company I work for (on and off). It's always interesting to see the striking parallels between genetic code and computer code.

One of the rules in the coding standards is "no commented-out code". i.e. don't do the thing which programmers very commonly do which is to render a section of code non-functional without having to delete it (by turning it into a section of comments), just in case it's needed later and needs to be re-instated. One reason why we create a rule against this, when trying to create robust, reliable, maintainable code, is that as soon as a section of code doesn't perform a function, because it's commented out, there is no way that it can cause errors when compiling (because the compiler ignores it). As soon as that happens, any errors in that code or sections that go out of date as the rest of the code develops, aren't flagged up. There's no selective mechanism to weed out errors.

This is strikingly similar to sections of our's and other creatures' DNA that are sometimes referred to as "bad code". If a section of DNA, for whatever reason, doesn't result in a physiological difference (if the link between genotype and phenotype is broken) then there is no selective pressure on that section. The difference, of course, is that nothing in the genetic code can be regarded as an "error" in the sense that it is in computer code, because, unlike with computer code, there isn't a programmer and a set of requirements to which the code is being developed to match.
Then again, I have long complained about the coupling of "biology" and "life". I see planets as being alive too - certainly the Earth is - and what we refer to as "life" is simply be the biological component of a living planet with active volcanism and water.
There is a sense in which we think of living things that live in colonies (e.g. ants and termites) such that the colony itself is the living thing and the individual members are component parts, analogous to cells. I suppose we can think of a thing like the Earth in the same way.
A side note, my favourite virus is the bacteriophage. How can you help but love a microorganism that lands on (often harmful) bacteria into which it injects the contents of its "head", which is (was) filled with DNA? https://imgur.com/gallery/m1veQla/comment/1347816287. Having little legs and a head shaped like an icosohedron are also endearing traits.
Funnily enough, that's my standard mental image of what a virus looks like. It reminds me of a little lunar lander, landing on the surface of an alien planet. I think one reason is that when I was a kid I had a book called "The Book of Comparisons" (one of my favourite books) which was full of comparisons of various things with various other things in terms of size, area, volume, mass, duration, etc. On one page there was a picture of that very virus with a paragraph pointing out that the size of of the virus relative to a human is about the same as the size of a human relative to the Earth. They left it to the reader to draw any conclusions that they might want to draw from that.
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 14992
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: Are viruses living things?

Post by Sy Borg »

The seven criteria for life were clearly compiled by organisms seeking self-similarity, no doubt because the particular species has quite a high opinion of itself :)
Steve3007 wrote: April 3rd, 2020, 3:14 amIt's always interesting to see the striking parallels between genetic code and computer code.
What are the main similarities you see between genetic code and C++? (I was never a programmer but I worked closely enough with them to be in trouble under your "no comment" system. I used them so to easily backtrack if I bumbled, and to provide transparency (because I wasn't a programmer).

As you say, there's no programmer to grumble about "bad code" in biology, aside from the Grim Reaper.
Steve3007 wrote: April 3rd, 2020, 3:14 amThere is a sense in which we think of living things that live in colonies (e.g. ants and termites) such that the colony itself is the living thing and the individual members are component parts, analogous to cells. I suppose we can think of a thing like the Earth in the same way.
I certainly do. Many astronauts living on the ISS do too, so it's not too crazy a notion.

What is the difference between a colony and a thing? What levels of interconnection and interdependency is needed for "they" to become "it"?

For instance, why is a sea sponge considered to be an animal while an ant colony is said to be a super-organism? Each sponge cell or ant is genetically identical. Different cells and ants have different specialised roles, and none are independent. If you artificially break them apart, they will work to come together again.

At the margins our definitions are exposed to be, at best, clusters of tendencies and, at worst, conveniences. Ultimately, all life forms on Earth are both a component of the biosphere and separate entities in themselves. What has the biosphere done in the past few billion years? Basically it has turned the top of the Earth's crust into itself and become more complex and varied in the process. Or, perhaps a tidier perspective is that the upper part of the Earth's crust has become ever more complex and dynamic over deep time?

So, being more than a bit of a panvitalist and panpsychist, I'm naturally easygoing about including viruses in the domain of life. Still, if one doesn't want to call them "life", how about contingently dynamic organic crystals? (I wrote a story called Let There be Rock: A Mythology of Geobiology, about how the Earth's geology resented the intrusion of biology and sent rogue organic crystals, ie. viruses, to turn biology back into geology again, ie. kill it. In case you're wondering, since I doubt anyone will ever read such an uncommercial piece, geology eventually won the "war" by sending a genetic virus to instil in a certain great ape a greater love for geology than biology, setting off a chain of events that resulted in AI).
Steve3007 wrote: April 3rd, 2020, 3:14 amFunnily enough, that's my standard mental image of what a virus looks like. It reminds me of a little lunar lander, landing on the surface of an alien planet. I think one reason is that when I was a kid I had a book called "The Book of Comparisons" (one of my favourite books) which was full of comparisons of various things with various other things in terms of size, area, volume, mass, duration, etc. On one page there was a picture of that very virus with a paragraph pointing out that the size of of the virus relative to a human is about the same as the size of a human relative to the Earth. They left it to the reader to draw any conclusions that they might want to draw from that.
Due to the growing antibiotic resistance of superbugs, there have been successful examples of people being injected with lunar landers, er, bacteriophages to cure bacterial disease that doesn't respond to antibiotics. Apparently, any resistance that bacteria develop to bacteriophages comes at the expense of antibiotic resistance (it seems that bacteria cannot walk and chew gum at the same time).

After all that has happened, though, I can't help wondering if repeated use of such treatments might result in a mutation that allows bacteriophages to attach to humans cells. Given that "there are more than 1031 bacteriophages on the planet, more than every other organism on Earth, including bacteria, combined", such a mutation could make things a tad hairy. Perhaps extinction-level hairy?
User avatar
h_k_s
Posts: 1243
Joined: November 25th, 2018, 12:09 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Aristotle
Location: Rocky Mountains

Re: Are viruses living things?

Post by h_k_s »

Steve3007 wrote: April 2nd, 2020, 2:56 pm Perhaps the covid-19 outbreak is another opportunity to talk about whether there is an objectively existing dividing line between a piece of complex chemistry and a living thing. At what level of complexity do we declare "here is life"? If an allegedly living thing is so small that we can see the individual atoms of which it is composed and create computer models of the chemical reactions that constitute it going about its daily business, is it alive?

Here's a lovely 3D rendering of a covid-19 virus injecting its genetic material into something, as many of us have no doubt done ourselves:
https://sketchfab.com/3d-models/coronav ... 13a43fa974
When I first took college undergrad upper division virology back in the day (1975), these questions of "what is life?" and of "is a virus alive?" were then as now also being asked. That was 45 years ago. Not much has changed, regarding this question, then as now.

Aristotle struggled with the notion of whether non-human animals had "breath" or "mind" or "soul."

From living with my cat over the past 6 years, I have concluded that cats certainly DO have breath/mind/soul.

As to whether a virion also has it, I cannot say.

You could just as well ask whether a beating heart removed from a human body and transplanted into another human has breath, mind, soul, or life? It beats on its own and continues to "live" even within another human's body.

A virion is like a beating heart in that it lives on even outside of its original "host" and goes on to replicate itself (its DNA or RNA) when it implants into another living host.

On the long list of things that humans simply don't know, the virion is on that list as well.
User avatar
h_k_s
Posts: 1243
Joined: November 25th, 2018, 12:09 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Aristotle
Location: Rocky Mountains

Re: Are viruses living things?

Post by h_k_s »

Greta wrote: April 2nd, 2020, 8:04 pm Love the interactive #D model!

What do you think, Steve?

I consider them to be alive because "infectious agent" is just a bespoke term to cover outliers like viruses and prions. There are many obligate parasites that require hosts to reproduce, so I don't begrudge them living status for that.

Viruses are different to other life in that they don't eat and are utterly unresponsive, until they land on a cell. Thus, some people describe them as "bad code". But does "bad code" evolve over billions of years, woven so closely into the fabric of life that they form critical parts of every eukaryote's microbiome and genetics? Seems like pretty good code to me.

Then again, I have long complained about the coupling of "biology" and "life". I see planets as being alive too - certainly the Earth is - and what we refer to as "life" is simply be the biological component of a living planet with active volcanism and water.

A side note, my favourite virus is the bacteriophage. How can you help but love a microorganism that lands on (often harmful) bacteria into which it injects the contents of its "head", which is (was) filled with DNA? https://imgur.com/gallery/m1veQla/comment/1347816287. Having little legs and a head shaped like an icosohedron are also endearing traits.
My own favorite virus is rabies, since it is still the most virulent organism on this Earth, and the death rate from rabies is 100% if not treated.
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 6227
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: Are viruses living things?

Post by Terrapin Station »

It's a demarcation criterion issue, or more generally, simply an issue of how individuals formulate their concepts. As such there's not a correct answer.

Typical criteria for life versus non-life include:

* Reproduction ability
* Metabolism and ability for growth/change
* Homeostasis
* Being made of cells
* Having a complex chemistry
* Containing DNA

Viruses do not meet some of these criteria--hence why they're often not considered to be living things. But of course we can simply modify the criteria, modify the concept, and they can count as life under a modified concept.
User avatar
LuckyR
Moderator
Posts: 7932
Joined: January 18th, 2015, 1:16 am

Re: Are viruses living things?

Post by LuckyR »

Regardless of the biases we put in the "criteria" for Life, viruses don't care.
"As usual... it depends."
User avatar
Terrapin Station
Posts: 6227
Joined: August 23rd, 2016, 3:00 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Bertrand Russell and WVO Quine
Location: NYC Man

Re: Are viruses living things?

Post by Terrapin Station »

LuckyR wrote: April 3rd, 2020, 11:30 am Regardless of the biases we put in the "criteria" for Life, viruses don't care.
Well, a fortiori they don't care because they don't have minds. ;-)
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 14992
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: Are viruses living things?

Post by Sy Borg »

Terrapin Station wrote: April 3rd, 2020, 9:48 am It's a demarcation criterion issue, or more generally, simply an issue of how individuals formulate their concepts. As such there's not a correct answer.

Typical criteria for life versus non-life include:

* Reproduction ability
* Metabolism and ability for growth/change
* Homeostasis
* Being made of cells
* Having a complex chemistry
* Containing DNA

Viruses do not meet some of these criteria--hence why they're often not considered to be living things. But of course we can simply modify the criteria, modify the concept, and they can count as life under a modified concept.
There are similar debates about the classification of brown dwarfs. They are said not to be true stars because they cannot fuse hydrogen (only its isotope, deuterium). Yet brown dwarfs are born in molecular clouds, not in protoplanetary discs like planets. As a result, they never orbit closely to (other?) stars in the system as planets. Why should it ability to fuse elements be seen as more important than its origin? Because that property is instinctively perceived as being lifelike, hence the constant use of metaphorical language used in science education everywhere, referring to the birth, life cycles and deaths of stars. But do stars die or simply change form into hyperdense objects that generate x-rays instead of visible light? Since x-rays are less useful to life that light, again, we place emphasis on that which we value.

A similar situation exists when comparing viruses with other microbes. Reproduction and metabolism would seem to be the most key features of life, the other criteria being either natural corollaries of those features, eg. complexity and homeostasis or rather arbitrary, eg. composed of cells. Since the key feature of humans is complexity, we tend to use complexity and systematisation as demarcation criteria, but that is reflective of our biases. Viruses reproduce and they steal metabolisms of other organisms, which is one way of having a metabolism.

Ultimately, anything deemed to be binary will have an intermediate state that is glossed over, eg. brown dwarfs, viruses and sea sponges. Broadly, oceans operate as a binary of opposite of land. So, what is a beach - part of the ocean or part of the land? Both and neither, of course. It's assumed there are only two genders, yet there are millions of intersexed and gender variant people in the world. Are dawn and dusk part of the day or of the night? Again, the answer is more functional than ontic. When is noise music, music, and not just noise? Why is a colony of sea sponge considered to be an animal while a colony of ants as a super-organism when their levels of genetic similarity and interdependencies are similarly?

Perhaps, especially with our greater knowledge of the details of things and with the advent of quantum computing, it is time to think more in threes than twos?
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 14992
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: Are viruses living things?

Post by Sy Borg »

h_k_s wrote: April 3rd, 2020, 9:33 am
Greta wrote: April 2nd, 2020, 8:04 pmA side note, my favourite virus is the bacteriophage. How can you help but love a microorganism that lands on (often harmful) bacteria into which it injects the contents of its "head", which is (was) filled with DNA? https://imgur.com/gallery/m1veQla/comment/1347816287. Having little legs and a head shaped like an icosohedron are also endearing traits.
My own favorite virus is rabies, since it is still the most virulent organism on this Earth, and the death rate from rabies is 100% if not treated.
Rabies and the others are featured on this beautiful virus gallery: https://www.dotphoto.com/viewalbum.asp?AID=6781872&S=Y#

Viruses often seem to look like crystals. No offence, but your favourite virus is butt ugly :) It has a "superpower", though, in its super-rapid proliferation, to fast for the immune system to respond.
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 14992
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: Are viruses living things?

Post by Sy Borg »

More about bacteriophages.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 131458.htm
... scientists have found hundreds of huge phages that carry a slew of bacterial proteins that the phages evidently use to more efficiently manipulate their microbial hosts. These proteins include those involved with ribosomal production of proteins and the CRISPR bacterial immune system, as if the phages are a hybrid between living microbes and viral machines.
https://www.livescience.com/largest-bac ... vered.html
"Typically, what separates life from nonlife is to have ribosomes and the ability to do translation; that is one of the major defining features that separate viruses and bacteria, nonlife and life," co-lead author Rohan Sachdeva, a research associate at UC Berkeley, said in the statement. "Some large phages have a lot of this translational machinery, so they are blurring the line a bit."
User avatar
h_k_s
Posts: 1243
Joined: November 25th, 2018, 12:09 pm
Favorite Philosopher: Aristotle
Location: Rocky Mountains

Re: Are viruses living things?

Post by h_k_s »

Greta wrote: April 3rd, 2020, 9:25 pm
h_k_s wrote: April 3rd, 2020, 9:33 am

My own favorite virus is rabies, since it is still the most virulent organism on this Earth, and the death rate from rabies is 100% if not treated.
Rabies and the others are featured on this beautiful virus gallery: https://www.dotphoto.com/viewalbum.asp?AID=6781872&S=Y#

Viruses often seem to look like crystals. No offence, but your favourite virus is butt ugly :) It has a "superpower", though, in its super-rapid proliferation, to fast for the immune system to respond.
Yah the rabies virus does indeed look like a microscopic t u r d.
User avatar
Sy Borg
Site Admin
Posts: 14992
Joined: December 16th, 2013, 9:05 pm

Re: Are viruses living things?

Post by Sy Borg »

h_k_s wrote: April 4th, 2020, 8:38 pm
Greta wrote: April 3rd, 2020, 9:25 pm

Rabies and the others are featured on this beautiful virus gallery: https://www.dotphoto.com/viewalbum.asp?AID=6781872&S=Y#

Viruses often seem to look like crystals. No offence, but your favourite virus is butt ugly :) It has a "superpower", though, in its super-rapid proliferation, to fast for the immune system to respond.
Yah the rabies virus does indeed look like a microscopic t u r d.
Yes, but you love it for what it can do, knowing that beauty is only protein coat deep.
User avatar
Pattern-chaser
Premium Member
Posts: 8265
Joined: September 22nd, 2019, 5:17 am
Favorite Philosopher: Cratylus
Location: England

Re: Are viruses living things?

Post by Pattern-chaser »

Greta wrote: April 3rd, 2020, 6:09 am
Steve3007 wrote: April 3rd, 2020, 3:14 amThere is a sense in which we think of living things that live in colonies (e.g. ants and termites) such that the colony itself is the living thing and the individual members are component parts, analogous to cells. I suppose we can think of a thing like the Earth in the same way.
I certainly do. Many astronauts living on the ISS do too, so it's not too crazy a notion.

What is the difference between a colony and a thing? What levels of interconnection and interdependency is needed for "they" to become "it"?
As far as I know, it's an accepted notion that some colonies act as though the colony itself is a living thing. To the extent that many are happy to see those colonies as being alive in themselves. The biggest example is the Earth itself, which gives rise to the belief system I follow, in the form of Gaia. At a less abstract level, insect colonies are the most prevalent examples.

As to your final questions, I think a colony might be judged alive if it acts alive. A colony is the same as any other creature in this: if it acts as though it lives, we assume it does. It seems reasonable to include colonies in this.
Pattern-chaser

"Who cares, wins"
Post Reply

Return to “Philosophy of Science”

2023/2024 Philosophy Books of the Month

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise

Entanglement - Quantum and Otherwise
by John K Danenbarger
January 2023

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul

Mark Victor Hansen, Relentless: Wisdom Behind the Incomparable Chicken Soup for the Soul
by Mitzi Perdue
February 2023

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness

Rediscovering the Wisdom of Human Nature: How Civilization Destroys Happiness
by Chet Shupe
March 2023

The Unfakeable Code®

The Unfakeable Code®
by Tony Jeton Selimi
April 2023

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are

The Book: On the Taboo Against Knowing Who You Are
by Alan Watts
May 2023

Killing Abel

Killing Abel
by Michael Tieman
June 2023

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead

Reconfigurement: Reconfiguring Your Life at Any Stage and Planning Ahead
by E. Alan Fleischauer
July 2023

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough

First Survivor: The Impossible Childhood Cancer Breakthrough
by Mark Unger
August 2023

Predictably Irrational

Predictably Irrational
by Dan Ariely
September 2023

Artwords

Artwords
by Beatriz M. Robles
November 2023

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope

Fireproof Happiness: Extinguishing Anxiety & Igniting Hope
by Dr. Randy Ross
December 2023

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes

Beyond the Golden Door: Seeing the American Dream Through an Immigrant's Eyes
by Ali Master
February 2024

2022 Philosophy Books of the Month

Emotional Intelligence At Work

Emotional Intelligence At Work
by Richard M Contino & Penelope J Holt
January 2022

Free Will, Do You Have It?

Free Will, Do You Have It?
by Albertus Kral
February 2022

My Enemy in Vietnam

My Enemy in Vietnam
by Billy Springer
March 2022

2X2 on the Ark

2X2 on the Ark
by Mary J Giuffra, PhD
April 2022

The Maestro Monologue

The Maestro Monologue
by Rob White
May 2022

What Makes America Great

What Makes America Great
by Bob Dowell
June 2022

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!

The Truth Is Beyond Belief!
by Jerry Durr
July 2022

Living in Color

Living in Color
by Mike Murphy
August 2022 (tentative)

The Not So Great American Novel

The Not So Great American Novel
by James E Doucette
September 2022

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches

Mary Jane Whiteley Coggeshall, Hicksite Quaker, Iowa/National Suffragette And Her Speeches
by John N. (Jake) Ferris
October 2022

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All

In It Together: The Beautiful Struggle Uniting Us All
by Eckhart Aurelius Hughes
November 2022

The Smartest Person in the Room: The Root Cause and New Solution for Cybersecurity

The Smartest Person in the Room
by Christian Espinosa
December 2022

2021 Philosophy Books of the Month

The Biblical Clock: The Untold Secrets Linking the Universe and Humanity with God's Plan

The Biblical Clock
by Daniel Friedmann
March 2021

Wilderness Cry: A Scientific and Philosophical Approach to Understanding God and the Universe

Wilderness Cry
by Dr. Hilary L Hunt M.D.
April 2021

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute: Tools To Spark Your Dream And Ignite Your Follow-Through

Fear Not, Dream Big, & Execute
by Jeff Meyer
May 2021

Surviving the Business of Healthcare: Knowledge is Power

Surviving the Business of Healthcare
by Barbara Galutia Regis M.S. PA-C
June 2021

Winning the War on Cancer: The Epic Journey Towards a Natural Cure

Winning the War on Cancer
by Sylvie Beljanski
July 2021

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream

Defining Moments of a Free Man from a Black Stream
by Dr Frank L Douglas
August 2021

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts

If Life Stinks, Get Your Head Outta Your Buts
by Mark L. Wdowiak
September 2021

The Preppers Medical Handbook

The Preppers Medical Handbook
by Dr. William W Forgey M.D.
October 2021

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress: A Practical Guide

Natural Relief for Anxiety and Stress
by Dr. Gustavo Kinrys, MD
November 2021

Dream For Peace: An Ambassador Memoir

Dream For Peace
by Dr. Ghoulem Berrah
December 2021