3 ms·
> something our bodies can’t synthesize Iodine is an element! As such, it cannot be produced by a chemical reaction and so isn't synthesized in any living orga
by kazinator 2y ago
> something our bodies can’t synthesize
Iodine is an element! As such, it cannot be produced by a chemical reaction and so isn't synthesized in any living organism.
It's produced in supernova explosions, by the rapid neutron capture process.
- anal_reactor 2y agoI'd argue that it's not completely unreasonable to claim that stars are living organisms in some sense of this expression
- djtango 2y agoAfter studying atmospheric Chemistry I found it hard to not feel like our planet was alive in some sense of the word but "alive" has a very precise meaning and Earth doesn't fit the definition. Presumably because it doesn't reproduce
- mjcohen 2y agoThen you might enjoy "Star Maker" by Olaf Stapeldon. It is available on Amazon.
- reactcore 2y agoGood to see one of my favorite books recommended here.
- fatata123 2y ago[dead]
- amelius 2y agoSo, what is wrong with the statement?
- jrootabega 2y agoAt best, it doesn't say anything useful. You can say the same thing about carbon, nitrogen, hydrogen, etc. At worst, it implies that, like essential amino acids, it CAN be synthesized by some living organism.
- JohnKemeny 2y agoAnd hamburgers (which the body cannot synthesize).
- amelius 2y ago> At worst, it implies that, like essential amino acids, it CAN be synthesized by some living organism. It does not imply that.
- kazinator 2y agoIn terms of a logical implication P -> Q, certainly not. Rhetorically, it does have that interpretation. When some unconditional proposition is presented together with some red herring conditions, a less informed reader may take the interpretation that the conditions are relevant; i.e. that it is falsified when the stated conditions do not hold. Because, why would the presenting expert include irrelevant conditions? "I've noticed that Smith doesn't beat his wife in public." That doesn't logically imply Smith beats his wife, but he does have to be beating his wife for the "in public" condition to be relevant. To assume that the condition is relevant is to assume that Smith does beat his wife. If the condition is not relevant, why is it there? I'd like to be able to assume that all conditions given in serious writing about STEM subjects are relevant, so I don't have to waste my time suspecting they are not.
- amelius 2y agoBut it __is__ relevant to the article that iodine cannot be synthesized by the human body ...
- fargle 2y ago