Posted: Jul 09, 2018 12:53 pm
by WiggleHead
Calilasseia wrote:
WiggleHead wrote:
Calilasseia wrote:Given the ubiquity of water here on Earth, there's not much scope for organisms to avoid it. It would also be pretty remarkable for any immune protein in any organism to develop a binding site for water, because there's not much scope for organisms that develop such a binding site. Plus, the usual outcome of such a weird event would be a fairly short but nasty death.

Plus, there's only two ways for a reaction to take place in such a scenario. One would be ionisation, in which case you'd need something else to bind to the H+ and OH- ions produced, and the end result would be an acid-base pair that would immediately react and reconstitute the original water molecule. The other would involve producing hydrogen and oxygen gas. Which would involve its own potentially lethal brand of hilarity.

Finally, anyone who treats the output of the Daily Mail seriously, isn't someone I'd treat seriously, given the reputation that pathetic excuse for a newspaper has.

I don't read the daily mail personally, it just came up when I googled water allergy. What makes it have a bad reputation?

Among those of us with a scientific education, the Daily Mail is one of the worst tabloid offenders, with respect to the matter of bad science reporting. There are talking budgies that could do a better job.

There's other news sites that covered these cases as well, just the Daily Mail one was one of the first to pop up. If you search Rachel Warwick's case there are several news sources that covered it and all mention she's unable to drink water as well, since it scorches her throat and leaves blisters. She also reacts the same way if she touches it.