Explanation: Iodine is a molecular element, it consists out of only one type of atom. Atoms being synthesized implies some nuclear reaction or decay going on, both would cause radiation.

Thank you. For the life of me I could not figure out why that is true.

I mean, it's possible that at some point evolution produced such nuclear reactored individual, but who got "naturally selected" rather quickly for obvious reasons

If you read some of the Dune supplementary materials, the sandworms are biological nuclear reactors. It's kinda handwavey but it's a cool concept - how do you keep a creature the size of a freight train moving constantly in a very thick medium... how about harvesting fissionables?

See the Isaac Asimov story "Pâté de Foie Gras" from the September 1956 issue of Astounding Science Fiction, available here [1] on the Internet Archive.

[1] https://archive.org/details/sim_astounding-science-fiction_1...

I long for the day when my liver can also act as a particle accelerator

The kidneys? A pair of calutrons.

Uhm, yes, is this where the line for the beta test starts?

You don't want either alpha or beta in your kidneys, not even for a test. The radiation could cause cancer.

Yeah, from Wikipedia:

> An essential nutrient is a nutrient required for normal physiological function that cannot be synthesized in the body (...) The nutrients considered essential for humans comprise nine amino acids, two fatty acids, thirteen vitamins, fifteen minerals and choline.

While some of these can be synthesized by other animals, this is not the case of minerals like iodine. I believe only organic compounds can be synthesized by animals.

Our bodies can synthesize several inorganic compounds, and other organisms can synthesize even more. There are biological sources of $H_{2}O$, $NH_{4}^{+}$, $NO$, $HCO_{3}^{−}$, $HPO_{4}^{2−}$, and (traditionally considered inorganic despite having carbon) $CO_{2}$. Iodine is an element, not a compound, and can only be synthesized through nuclear processes, not chemical ones.

I feel your use of TeX (or whatever that notation is precisely ...) is far too clear.

Possibly use InChI instead, so instead of "$HPO_{4}^{2−}$", use "InChI=1S/H3O4P/c1-5(2,3)4/h(H3,1,2,3,4)/p-2". Or, more concisely, just use the key, which is "NBIIXXVUZAFLBC-UHFFFAOYSA-L". :)

(from : https://www.ebi.ac.uk/chebi/searchId.do?chebiId=43474)

Or just unicode. Standard digraphs ftw (xcompose, wincompose...). It's even typed in the same way (_4 ^+ etc) - and maybe there's tex tools that output unicode these days where possible?

H₂O, NH₄⁺, NO, HCO₃⁻, HPO₄²⁻

Or Hacker News could finally add support for LaTeX and markdown...

Yes, that's pretty good ... but - the charges on [NH4]+, [HCO3]-, and [HPO4]2- should be above the subscripts on their last atoms. Minor point really.

true, true... I wonder if that's even possible to do in unicode. maybe some combining char thing. I certainly wouldn't be able to type a digraph of it from memory if it is. But, I feel it's still more readable this way

The definition I remember from my chemistry class is that organic compounds are those having at least one C-H bond.

It's a reasonable definition, especially when classifying biochemicals, but there are always edge cases.

For example : https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Carborane that definitely do have C-H bonds but are mostly B-B, B-C, B-H.

What is this kind of notation from/based on? e.g $H_{2}O$

That's TeX. Every time Donald Knuth gets distracted from writing The Art of Computer Programming, he makes another piece of load-bearing infrastructure. (TeX came about because the second edition of Volume 1 didn't look as nice as the first edition.)

Looks like LaTeX syntax.

LaTeX would be \(H_{2}O\) – or, more likely, \ce{H2O} or \ch{H2O}.

Minerals (as the term is used in nutrition, not in mining) are chemical elements, not "compounds". They are part of the constituents that can be synthesised into compounds. Usually our bodies obtain them in some form of organic or inorganic salts, which are compounds, so we obtain them as parts of compounds. To synthesise compounds that contain iodine, you need iodine in some form. As we are not talking about nuclear reactions through which elements are synthesised through other elements, there is no way humans, animals or plants synthesise any minerals like iodine, we all obtain them from some source. The original sentence is weird, because it talks as if iodine can be synthesised somehow chemically but just our bodies are unable to.

Does respiration count as synthesis?

or you become the main character of a superhero comics