Originally posted by stickman618
they are symbiotes, because the host benefits from the enhanced strength, accelerated regeneration, and disease immunity(i think), and if it is attached to a cancer patient, it will feed off the cancer cells, or at least halt its progressionand the symbiote benefits from whatever nutrients the host provides.
they are symbiotes... more specifically, symbiotes sharing a mutual relationship
Wow.
Young man or lady
YOU have vailed bioloigy the host does not benfit.
If it wasnt for the Cassidy's and eddies cancer the host would be DEAD
Thus no benfiting if you had bothered to do some reaserch you would know that the symbiote slowly eats the skin. Also A tapeworm has silimar effects It eats bad stuff in the blood right. Well then it dies and you die with it unless its caught. Newsflash a Tapeworm is Defined as a this is a shocker....PARASITE..wow if u guessed it your good, go try out for jeprody of mabye Are you smarter then a 5th grader cause you got them kindergarden kids beat good.
Originally posted by F_doomed
Wow.
Young man or lady
YOU have vailed bioloigy the host does not benfit.
If it wasnt for the Cassidy's and eddies cancer the host would be DEAD
Thus no benfiting if you had bothered to do some reaserch you would know that the symbiote slowly eats the skin. Also A tapeworm has silimar effects It eats bad stuff in the blood right. Well then it dies and you die with it unless its caught. Newsflash a Tapeworm is Defined as a this is a shocker....PARASITE..wow if u guessed it your good, go try out for jeprody of mabye Are you smarter then a 5th grader cause you got them kindergarden kids beat good.
eats skin?? first i've heard of that
and i'm not talking about tapeworms(which are obviously parasites)
oh, and you've failed english
I am a biologist. But I use Wikipedia like anyone else for easy referencing. This is what it says, which is all true:
The term was first used in 1879 by the German mycologist, Heinrich Anton de Bary, who defined it as: "THE LIVING TOGETHER OF UNLIKE ORGANISMS".
Some define symbiosis in the sense that De Bary intended, describing a close relationship between organisms in which the outcome for each is highly dependent upon the other. The relationship may be categorized as mutualism (both host and symbiote benefit), parasitism (parasite only benefits), commensalism (host only benefits). Others define it more narrowly, as only those relationships from which both organisms benefit, in which case it would be synonymous with mutualism. This is actually the colloquial usage.
Technically, what Marvel is calling 'symbiotes' appear to be parasites. However, true mutualists just need to give something back to the host. So if Marvel's 'symbiotes' help their hosts to reproduce (say Venom gets laid a lot) or eat (say Venom steals food from organic supermarkets), then they are actually mutualistic (or the colloquial definition of symbiotic), even if they suck all the life out of them and send them to an early grave (as appeared to be the case in the What if Secret Wars). I don't know about these so it is not possible to identify them as mutualistic or just parasitic. There was a time when the 'symbiotes' appeared to feed on chemicals from Brock's cancer (like tapeworms, the parasites mentioned above). If this helped keep him alive by a LARGE reduction in chemicals then they would be mutualists. If they are like tapeworms and feed on such small concentrations that it does not help the host, they are parasites (because they have other negative effects on the host). The difference between parasite and mutualist is the effect on the host. However, based on the way 'symbiotes' take over species and planets, they appear to be parasites and not mutualists (but still technically symbiotes according to the definition). A little more than everyone wanted to know I bet, but there is your biology lesson for the day.
werehawk, here you go: The final two pages with the Scorpion Symbiote-thing... sorry it took so long to get to you.
Originally posted by Neo Darkhalen
How about this, it's a comic, and the symbiotes are comic villains, there was a recon with them, but the original design was that they were symbiotes since brock got Spider-Mans powers; the symbiote got a host and security.
It wasn't necessarily a retcon, since as far as I can remember (might be wrong on this), the writters never said that the Symbiote wasn't originally out to just benefite from having a host. I think the Symbiote has evolved and changed due to writters changing their mind on the character's goal. So I'd agree in saying that it was a Symbiote, but is now a parasite.
Originally posted by werehawk
I am a biologist. But I use Wikipedia like anyone else for easy referencing. This is what it says, which is all true:
The term was first used in 1879 by the German mycologist, Heinrich Anton de Bary, who defined it as: "THE LIVING TOGETHER OF UNLIKE ORGANISMS".
Some define symbiosis in the sense that De Bary intended, describing a close relationship between organisms in which the outcome for each is highly dependent upon the other. The relationship may be categorized as mutualism (both host and symbiote benefit), parasitism (parasite only benefits), commensalism (host only benefits). Others define it more narrowly, as only those relationships from which both organisms benefit, in which case it would be synonymous with mutualism. This is actually the colloquial usage.Technically, what Marvel is calling 'symbiotes' appear to be parasites. However, true mutualists just need to give something back to the host. So if Marvel's 'symbiotes' help their hosts to reproduce (say Venom gets laid a lot) or eat (say Venom steals food from organic supermarkets), then they are actually mutualistic (or the colloquial definition of symbiotic), even if they suck all the life out of them and send them to an early grave (as appeared to be the case in the What if Secret Wars). I don't know about these so it is not possible to identify them as mutualistic or just parasitic. There was a time when the 'symbiotes' appeared to feed on chemicals from Brock's cancer (like tapeworms, the parasites mentioned above). If this helped keep him alive by a LARGE reduction in chemicals then they would be mutualists. If they are like tapeworms and feed on such small concentrations that it does not help the host, they are parasites (because they have other negative effects on the host). The difference between parasite and mutualist is the effect on the host. However, based on the way 'symbiotes' take over species and planets, they appear to be parasites and not mutualists (but still technically symbiotes according to the definition). A little more than everyone wanted to know I bet, but there is your biology lesson for the day.
well benefits for the host include; rapid regeneration, strength, agility
negative effects include; well somebody fill this in
so it gives the host cool abilities so it will not notice the negative effects, what would you call that?
Originally posted by kiekan
werehawk, here you go: The final two pages with the Scorpion Symbiote-thing... sorry it took so long to get to you.It wasn't necessarily a retcon, since as far as I can remember (might be wrong on this), the writters never said that the Symbiote wasn't originally out to just benefite from having a host. I think the Symbiote has evolved and changed due to writters changing their mind on the character's goal. So I'd agree in saying that it was a Symbiote, but is now a parasite.
Co-signed.
Originally posted by Neo Darkhalen
I can post what I want, it's not hurting anyone, symbiotes do not eat skin they have become a parasite in more recent years, will Eddie get the symbiote back, who knows? also it has become more intelligent and aware.
I loved how it like you just dont have enough venom then CYA!!