|
This is obviously not about water but about overpriced bottled water.
While I don't agree with the state patronizing its citizens, it is clear to me that the intention of this "edict" is to prevent advertising that would lead consumers to believe bottled water is somehow better than normal water for preventing dehydration.
Read the advice of "The Telegraph" on the very same subject a year ago:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/8632375/Advice-to-drink-eight-glasses-of-water-daily-nonsense.html
But suddenly when the EU makes a ruling based on a similar opinion it is of course utter bullshit. Typical british anti-EU hysteria.
|
On November 20 2011 23:51 EtherealDeath wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2011 23:48 TallMax wrote:While dehydration means not having enough water, if you're dehydrated (not just thirsty, but with the condition of being really dehydrated) you don't just drink a bunch of water, you drink water with different salts (electrolytes) in it, like gatorade, powerade, and the like; otherwise, your body doesn't absorb the water, you just piss it out. While it does seem silly, and they probably should have focused on the difference between thirst and dehydration, there is a reasonable point that they're making: straight up water intake won't cure particularly serious dehydration. If you have a serious situation where someone needs to rehydrate, grab them anything other than just straight up water, otherwise they might even just puke it up: NIH Listing for dehydration I thought the thing in question is not that water will hydrate a dehydrated person, but rather that water intake can help prevent reaching a dehydrated state.
Oops, thanks for pointing that out, I might have misread it a bit. I'm not sure to what extent drinking water prevents dehydration, at least by itself.
|
next they'll claim that alcohol does.
|
I find this story pretty hilarious, in the most depressing possible way...
On November 20 2011 23:52 Silidons wrote:
on the local news they were talking about how driving while tired can lead to accidents, and i shit you not this is what they said:
"According to AAA (popular auto club, if you have car problem they can get a tow truck to you in like 20-30 mins wherever u are etc) some ways that you can prevent driving while tired is to drive when you are more awake.."
like oh no shit really? you had to have this on the news?
This story brought to you by John Madden?
|
The people who make these kind of decisions are all bought and paid for, it's hardly even worth reading this rubbish anymore. No doubt there will be some loophole specifically created so that X company can still continue to market their "Super Ultra Hydration Water!" whilst all the competition can't.
In the end it's all about money.
|
On November 20 2011 23:45 EtherealDeath wrote:
It's not that they are stupid, it's just that someone stuffed their pockets in exchange for this ruling, and they sufficiently don't give a shit or this is a normal enough thing to do that no one cares that it sounds dumb as fuck.
no they have stringent regulations that prevent companies from trying bullshit people in all sorts of ways, however subtle or silly or obvious or not they seem, they must abide to their regulation and not make exceptions.
it is already common sense that drinking water "hydrates" us so i dont know why people are complaining that a company who is trying every little thing it can to bullshit and coerce people is having to abide by a very important regulation that is not so near-sighted as many people are treating the situation
|
konadora
Singapore66364 Posts
why they fuck aren't they doing something more important, say, fixing the economy?
|
Prof Brian Ratcliffe, spokesman for the Nutrition Society, said dehydration was usually caused by a clinical condition and that one could remain adequately hydrated without drinking water.
He said: “The EU is saying that this does not reduce the risk of dehydration and that is correct.
“This claim is trying to imply that there is something special about bottled water which is not a reasonable claim.”
Uh, sounds pretty reasonable to me? Don't see what the fuss is about.
|
i bet the reason they can't always say "water hydrates you" is because in some cases drinking water won't.
lets say you have high ADH in your body. ingestion of water will signal your supraoptic hypothalamic nuclei to stop secreting ADH. aldosterone production in your adrenal cortex is decreased, angiotensin II is not converted from angiotensin I by ACE, there is no Na intake in your ascending thick limb in the kidneys etc etc.
that is why bodybuilders in contest shape drink lots of water to avoid water retention which makes you look bloated. a lot of times when you are cutting, drinking water dehydrates you.
i bet when they did the study they couldn't get the type I error to be < .05. just because a scientific study can't prove something doesn't make it untrue; it means they need to change the parameters of the subject.
|
On November 20 2011 23:58 MasterKush wrote:
The people who make these kind of decisions are all bought and paid for, it's hardly even worth reading this rubbish anymore. No doubt there will be some loophole specifically created so that X company can still continue to market their "Super Ultra Hydration Water!" whilst all the competition can't.
In the end it's all about money.
It's obviously Gatorade! 
Here I was thinking the EU would make more rational decisions concerning food. Guess sanity is in short supply in every government!
|
On November 20 2011 23:58 MasterKush wrote:
The people who make these kind of decisions are all bought and paid for, it's hardly even worth reading this rubbish anymore. No doubt there will be some loophole specifically created so that X company can still continue to market their "Super Ultra Hydration Water!" whilst all the competition can't.
In the end it's all about money.
It's hilarious. Politicians can make the most populistic decisions and still be suspected to do it for the money.
|
United Kingdom16710 Posts
On November 21 2011 00:02 konadora wrote:
why they fuck aren't they doing something more important, say, fixing the economy?
They were clearly not drinking any water until the final report came out. And they were right!
|
On November 21 2011 00:02 konadora wrote:
why they fuck aren't they doing something more important, say, fixing the economy?
Well, that is really really hard. This one was a shot on open goal. After fucking up about a dozen times a day for the last five years, it's nice that the EU finally succeeds at something 
|
Perfectly reasonable to do this.
Fun though it is to poke fun at stuff like this, it would be preferable if people actually looked into it a little more than the headlines.
|
On November 20 2011 23:55 TallMax wrote:Show nested quote +On November 20 2011 23:51 EtherealDeath wrote:On November 20 2011 23:48 TallMax wrote:While dehydration means not having enough water, if you're dehydrated (not just thirsty, but with the condition of being really dehydrated) you don't just drink a bunch of water, you drink water with different salts (electrolytes) in it, like gatorade, powerade, and the like; otherwise, your body doesn't absorb the water, you just piss it out. While it does seem silly, and they probably should have focused on the difference between thirst and dehydration, there is a reasonable point that they're making: straight up water intake won't cure particularly serious dehydration. If you have a serious situation where someone needs to rehydrate, grab them anything other than just straight up water, otherwise they might even just puke it up: NIH Listing for dehydration I thought the thing in question is not that water will hydrate a dehydrated person, but rather that water intake can help prevent reaching a dehydrated state. Oops, thanks for pointing that out, I might have misread it a bit. I'm not sure to what extent drinking water prevents dehydration, at least by itself.
water doesn't prevent dehydration
the amount of hydration in your body is dependent on your ADH, renin, angiotensinogen, ACE, Na, and other electrolytes in your body. if these enzyme levels are low or the mechanism is dysfunctional, you won't be able to keep hydrated regardless of the amount of water you drink.
take for example someone suffering from diabetes insipidus. no matter how much water they drink they won't be able to prevent dehydration.
if humans needed 8 glasses of water a day to prevent dehydration, most of us would be suffering from dehydration. many humans with normal enzyme/electrolyte levels can live healthy lives with minimal water intake.
|
Just because something is true doesn't mean you can put it on a label. For example you also probably can't put "cholesterol free" on a bottle of water because only animal products have cholesterol so why would water have cholesterol in the first place?
|
Even if they're only trying to prevent claims that there's something special about bottled water, it would still be vastly preferable to regulate the price of bottled water to be somehow related to the actual cost of water in a bottle.
|
On November 21 2011 00:02 Surth wrote:Show nested quote +Prof Brian Ratcliffe, spokesman for the Nutrition Society, said dehydration was usually caused by a clinical condition and that one could remain adequately hydrated without drinking water.
He said: “The EU is saying that this does not reduce the risk of dehydration and that is correct.
“This claim is trying to imply that there is something special about bottled water which is not a reasonable claim.” Uh, sounds pretty reasonable to me? Don't see what the fuss is about.
Could people please read this post
This is obviously not about water but about overpriced bottled water. While I don't agree with the state patronizing its citizens, it is clear to me that the intention of this "edict" is to prevent advertising that would lead consumers to believe bottled water is somehow better than normal water for preventing dehydration. Read the advice of "The Telegraph" on the very same subject a year ago: http://www.telegraph.co.uk/health/healthnews/8632375/Advice-to-drink-eight-glasses-of-water-daily-nonsense.htmlBut suddenly when the EU makes a ruling based on a similar opinion it is of course utter bullshit. Typical british anti-EU hysteria.
And then this one.
Please stop posting without reading anything more than the thread title. The same can be said for the pizza = vegetables thread. Please, attention spans. Work on them.
|
On November 21 2011 00:12 BlackJack wrote:
Just because something is true doesn't mean you can put it on a label. For example you also probably can't put "cholesterol free" on a bottle of water because only animal products have cholesterol so why would water have cholesterol in the first place?
the statement is actually not true at all. just because everyone believes it to be true does not make it true. read my previous post to find out why or go to med school.
|
This banned false advertisement. One doesn't need to buy and drink bottled water to prevent dehydration, as is suggested. People that buy and drink bottled water because they think they need to hydrate themselves drink too much water which is arguably damaging.
Sounds like butthurt Americans that are too weak to rage against their own government.
Not to mention this is actually anti corporate lobby rather than pure corruption in the case of the US.
On November 21 2011 00:19 PrideNeverDie wrote:
the statement is actually not true at all. just because everyone believes it to be true does not make it true. read my previous post to find out why or go to med school.
This is about Europe, not the US. We have regulations for this stuff. They try to serve the people and protect customers rather than collude with corporations in tricking them as is done in the US.
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
