So, I’ve just read an interesting article in “another magazine” (follow the link in a previous blog to understand this not very amusing comment). The article in question considers the possibility that heavy isotopes contribute to longevity. See here

Specifically, a daily dose of heavy water (i.e. that enriched in deuterium, D2O, compared to “normal” water, which is mainly H2O) may result in a longer (not necessarily happier) life. I haven’t actually read the source work (OK, at least I’m being honest), but if I understand things correctly, the argument goes like this: the higher bond strengths that accompany heavy isotopes (e.g. C-D, versus C-H) are beneficial when it comes to capturing free radicals. Sounds eminently plausible.

I wonder if it’s possible to test this idea to some extent by simply looking at rates of ageing (etc.) across the globe, or perhaps more usefully, within a single large country like the USA. Since natural waters on Earth vary in their content of deuterium by a factor of two, maybe it would be possible to identify an effect within datasets that (presumably) already exist. I appreciate there could be a zillion other factors that go along with geographical location, but maybe isotopic composition is not something that has been considered previously in the business of gerontology.

As an isotope chemist I’m always interested in the ways that isotopes (and, to be clear, we’re talking about stable entities here, not radioactive ones) may have unforeseen effects. As a hypothesis, without much by way of supporting evidence, I have often wondered whether isotope ratios play a (key?) role in the origin of life. In a general sense, I’m convinced that one of the reasons we haven’t yet understood this phenomenon is because we haven’t yet been able to contemplate (or reproduce) the conditions necessary to facilitate this. Isotopic composition may be one such variable that we should take into account. The problem is: we are generally constrained in our thinking about life (on Earth) to scenarios that are geocentric, or even uniformitarian, in nature. What about if the key ingredient is carbon with an isotope ratio, 12C/13C, of 4 (i.e. that obtained in the CNO-cycle in stars), as opposed to the value of 90 we observe today on Earth? I’m not necessarily arguing a case for panspermia; maybe this all took place on Earth using “normal” Solar System materials (maybe we just haven’t discovered these materials yet – maybe they are in a certain class of comet or asteroid)?

OK, time for Occam’s Razor and some snake-oil…