Anyways, the gist of that article was that common cold was a retrovirus and thus impossible to cure.
This is confusing "
retrovirus" and "
rhinovirus."
Obscure Tasmanian clothing brands aside, the phrases "
retro" and "
rhino" generally don't go together, and certainly aren't interchangeable.
The "common cold" is a nickname we give to a broad set of literally thousands of diseases which generally cause similar symptoms. This is the real reason we can't cure it, by the way -- something developed for one won't help with others, and the way those diseases are constantly mutating and producing new strains renders the entire thing a massively moving target. We could
easily develop a cure (or vaccine) for any one of them... but not only would it do limited good (thanks to the sheer number of "common colds" out there), the damn thing would have mutated into an entirely different disease by the time we rolled the cure/vaccine out.
And then there's the issue of getting the treatment to the right patients given how similar all of those diseases look to each other.
More importantly, your inability to distinguish between the two concepts does
not do your credibility much good.
Or:
Perhaps I shouldn't believe everything I do find...
The closest you get to correct there is that there's a shitton of retroviruses out there -- but the diseases they cause are nowhere near as mild as the cold. We're talking about things like AIDS and cancer here. This is why
antiretroviral drugs have been such an incredibly high priority for medical research over the last few decades.
Oh, and there is a good bit of DNA in us that originally comes from viruses. That's mostly of academic interest, and a side-effect of the fact that we've been living alongside the damned things for pretty much our entire evolutionary history.
Given your demonstrated reading comprehension so far, however, I should probably clarify: That "mostly of academic interest" bit? It's formal speech for "scientists think its cool, and we can probably learn some stuff from looking at it, but it doesn't matter one fucking bit outside a lab."
TL;DR? Your comments were the sort of linguistic diarrhea typically associated with the
Gish Gallop.
Or, as Total put it, you're not even wrong.