Doesn't this strongly imply that we are actually quite immune to virus naturally, and only that a depressed immune system is what allows viruses to wreak havoc?
You seem to think of viruses as all the same? The headline (and text before the paywall) does not say or imply that these are human-infectious viruses. They're just viruses. As in, a basic form of life, basic enough that it's highly questionable whether it makes sense to call them living. They're everywhere. As are bacteria, and bugs (rapidly descending in orders of magnitude in that "everywhere"!) But it's certainly news to me that trillions are falling from the sky; I would have guessed that uv radiation would disrupt ("kill"?) them.
>Do viruses even fit the definition of something alive?
You said:
>"...does not say or imply that these are human-infectious viruses."
Article said:
>"Viruses and their prey..."
I think it's safe to assume this article's intent is to share information that is not obviously known to everyone, that's it's supposed to be "news" (ie, it's from the New York Times). So let's not pretend that this article is a rehash of common knowledge about the value/state of viruses.
