Abstract
Objective: Water, often considered a fundamental component of life, is the most commonly used ingredient in the formulation of dermocosmetic products, with waterless products being the exception. Dermocosmetic products can contain anywhere from 50% to 85% water, which contributes to their texture and specific characteristics. The chemical composition of water varies depending on its origin and can be categorized as highly mineralized or low mineralized. These compositions could impact the water's efficacy in anti‐aging applications. In this study, the objective is evaluating the anti‐aging properties of highly and low mineralized water with the model organism Caenorhabditis elegans.Methods: In this article, we employed the alternative model organism C. elegans to assess the impact of 5 branded waters, one physiological water and one ultra‐pure water on the model's lifespan, using the survival medium conventionally used for C. elegans as a comparison.Results: Waters may have either a positive or a negative impact on the C. elegans lifespan expectancy. Our results indicate that only one of the water brands we assessed (Volvic®) had a significantly positive effect on worm longevity. In contrast, we found that two other brands (Hepar® and Contrex®) had a negative impact on the later stages of the worm's adulthood. Furthermore, we demonstrated that the impact of the brand water samples on lifespan expectancy varied depending on their physicochemical composition, in particular when ion concentrations were most extreme.Conclusion This study shows that the highly mineralized waters studied have a detrimental effect on the survival of C. elegans , and a preliminary test with ultra‐pure water could not be completed due to its deleterious effect on the worms. This suggests the hypothesis that both highly mineralized and completely demineralized waters may not be the most suitable for skin formulations.