|
On November 21 2011 03:51 Azzur wrote:My post in the previous thread on this issue that got closed: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=286499#20Now, if you want to get technical, if someone is suffering from dehydration, then water is not a good (and even potentially dangerous) way of re-hydrating them. It is far better to use an electrolyte drink. Also, people are not reading between the lines of ruling far enough and relying on the tone of the extremely biased article - the ruling was meant to stop drink companies from promoting their water as more healthy, when in reality, simple tap water is probably more effective. However, what I'll comment is that the world seems to be descending into big brother govt where they seem to want to regulate every bit of life. Which is guess is what the people are asking for as they get fooled by advertising gimmicks and sue/protest when they make stupid decisions. What happened to good old common sense?
That's ridiculous. In layman's terms, water helps flush out your system, there is no way water is worse for doing that than water which already stuff in it.
also, from the OP's spoiler "They applied for the right to state that “regular consumption of significant amounts of water can reduce the risk of development of dehydration” as well as preventing a decrease in performance."
I don't like the fact someone tried to claim that. The moment you stop consuming, the risk is the same as it ever was.
|
http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/doc/1982.pdf Real article, don't be a retard and read tabloids.
Although I do think "The proposed claim does not comply with the requirements for a disease risk
reduction claim pursuant to Article 14 of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006" is kinda unspecific.
|
On November 21 2011 04:24 superjoppe wrote:http://www.efsa.europa.eu/en/efsajournal/doc/1982.pdf Real article, don't be a retard and read tabloids. Although I do think "The proposed claim does not comply with the requirements for a disease risk reduction claim pursuant to Article 14 of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006" is kinda unspecific.
Article 14:
"In order to ensure that the claims made are truthful, it is
necessary that the substance that is the subject of the
claim is present in the final product in quantities that are
sufficient, or that the substance is absent or present in
suitably reduced quantities, to produce the nutritional or
physiological effect claimed. The substance should also be
available to be used by the body. In addition, and where
appropriate, a significant amount of the substance producing
the claimed nutritional or physiological effect should
be provided by a quantity of the food that can reasonably
be expected to be consumed."
Water alone does not prevent dehydration, I don't find this unspecific at all.
|
On November 20 2011 23:41 FaCE_1 wrote:
it's true, clearly Beer prevent dehydration.
I just don't know what is true and what is not in the world now... Soon they will tell that to give milk to baby is wrong and they should only drink orange juice
that fad is already over. breast feeding went out of fashion and it wasn't even very long ago.
|
On November 21 2011 03:06 sVnteen wrote:
it makes sense that water does prevent you form dehydrating doesnt it?
i dont have any problem with them saying that their water is preventing dehydration but of course they cant say (only) OUR water prevents dehydration kinda obvious right?
If you see two identical bottles with exactly the same information about the water at exactly the same prize, but one has a sticker with "prevents dehydration". Which bottle would you take?
Chances are that there will be more people taking the bottle with the sticker. What happens 3 months later? All bottles with the same water at the same prize will say "prevents dehydration". Only difference is that the company first introducing the sticker would have sold more.
10 years latet 15 different stickers are present at the bottles getting changed based on what the people of the area likes to see most. All the statements are half-true like "Chewing nicotine gum will give you a new life without cigarettes!"
|
Bottled water is the biggest scam in the history of man kind.
|
Banning water bottles from saying they can prevent dehydration is stupid.
Justcurious but is Powerade/Gatorade allowed to say they prevent dehydration?
On November 21 2011 11:18 Day[10] wrote:
Bottled water is the biggest scam in the history of man kind.
Yep. Agreed. Its cheaper to drink a liter of gasoline then a liter of water
|
I have a headache now. I'm going to liquidate my body and have someone inject me into my computer's motherboard so I can become the internets.
Seriously though... why is this possible?
|
"Not to be outdone, US Congress has now banned the claim that pizza can prevent starvation"
|
Wait, dehydration means you dont have fluid in your body... What?
|
And all the EU and elsewhere people rip on the US for some dumb laws and regulations. There are ridiculous laws everywhere and sensationalist anti-common sense stories seems to indicate somehow one group of people is dumber than others.
|
On November 21 2011 11:31 AxelTVx wrote:
Wait, dehydration means you dont have fluid in your body... What?
For God's sake, you and your likes, PLEASE read the last 7 or so pages where this question is answered again and again and again.
|
On November 21 2011 11:29 Supamang wrote:
"Not to be outdone, US Congress has now banned the claim that pizza can prevent starvation"
your trying to make a joke but how many people who live on things like pizza die every year of malnutrition? dehydration is more complex than water, water alone will not always fix the issue.
|
On November 21 2011 11:24 Orcasgt24 wrote:
Yep. Agreed. Its cheaper to drink a liter of gasoline then a liter of water
Wait, is that a bad idea? Because... well, you see, it's kinda a long story, involving this fat black guy from Alabama, Tha Oakland Asian, and about $300.
What? I wanted an hour of coaching with IdrA. Don't tell me you wouldn't drink a gallon of gas and swallow a match. Plus there might of been some red phosphorous and some thermite, who knows these days.
|
It really takes a terrible opinion of humanity to think that people are so stupid they will believe in large numbers that one bottle of water will prevent dehydration and the other won't.
I get there are some very stupid people in the world, but the number of people who are honestly this stupid is so miniscule that's it's not even worth worrying about.
Also, it isn't the government's job to protect really stupid people from choosing a different brand of water. It causes no harm to anyone, and therefore shouldn't be regulated, and the water companies aren't making a false claim to say that water prevents dehydration.
|
On November 21 2011 11:56 liberal wrote:
It really takes a terrible opinion of humanity to think that people are so stupid they will believe in large numbers that one bottle of water will prevent dehydration and the other won't.
I get there are some very stupid people in the world, but the number of people who are honestly this stupid is so miniscule that's it's not even worth worrying about.
Also, it isn't the government's job to protect really stupid people from choosing a different brand of water. It causes no harm to anyone, and therefore shouldn't be regulated, and the water companies aren't making a false claim to say that water prevents dehydration.
you would think people would be too stupid to drink and drive, you would think people would be too stupid to leave loaded guns around their houses the list goes on and on. if people arent told exactly then they will get it horribly wrong over and over. unless you think that a sticker is too much work to save someones life
|
On November 21 2011 11:49 turdburgler wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2011 11:29 Supamang wrote:
"Not to be outdone, US Congress has now banned the claim that pizza can prevent starvation" your trying to make a joke but how many people who live on things like pizza die every year of malnutrition? dehydration is more complex than water, water alone will not always fix the issue.
ugh..let me guess, if a diver requested some more oxygen you would be that guy telling everyone how oxygen is poisonous and that he really needs a mixture of different gasses.
edit: ah fuckit
|
well i stopped drinking bottled water when i got sick for a few days after drinking a case of 24 of them in a about 1.5 days. i just started geting sick and yes its bottled water the shits bad for you. stick to the tap.
i think the argument here is that the people know that bottled water is indeed bad for you, so they wont allow any positives. I COMMEND them for it and thank god. bottled water is a bad water source.
|
On November 21 2011 04:18 Cyber_Cheese wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2011 03:51 Azzur wrote:My post in the previous thread on this issue that got closed: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=286499#20Now, if you want to get technical, if someone is suffering from dehydration, then water is not a good (and even potentially dangerous) way of re-hydrating them. It is far better to use an electrolyte drink. Also, people are not reading between the lines of ruling far enough and relying on the tone of the extremely biased article - the ruling was meant to stop drink companies from promoting their water as more healthy, when in reality, simple tap water is probably more effective. However, what I'll comment is that the world seems to be descending into big brother govt where they seem to want to regulate every bit of life. Which is guess is what the people are asking for as they get fooled by advertising gimmicks and sue/protest when they make stupid decisions. What happened to good old common sense? That's ridiculous. In layman's terms, water helps flush out your system, there is no way water is worse for doing that than water which already stuff in it. also, from the OP's spoiler "They applied for the right to state that “regular consumption of significant amounts of water can reduce the risk of development of dehydration” as well as preventing a decrease in performance." I don't like the fact someone tried to claim that. The moment you stop consuming, the risk is the same as it ever was.
Well, that's where you have not got it right - water is not the best option for someone suffering from dehydration. It is even possible to kill yourself drinking too much water. So, in that sense, the experts have got it right. However, the need to make this kind of ruling to snuff out advertising gimmicks is a sad reflection on humanity and big brother govt.
Anyways, for those not believing me: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dehydration
Read the part about the treatment for dehydration, where in severe cases a balance of water and electrolytes is needed.
|
On November 21 2011 12:03 Azzur wrote:Show nested quote +On November 21 2011 04:18 Cyber_Cheese wrote:On November 21 2011 03:51 Azzur wrote:My post in the previous thread on this issue that got closed: http://www.teamliquid.net/forum/viewmessage.php?topic_id=286499#20Now, if you want to get technical, if someone is suffering from dehydration, then water is not a good (and even potentially dangerous) way of re-hydrating them. It is far better to use an electrolyte drink. Also, people are not reading between the lines of ruling far enough and relying on the tone of the extremely biased article - the ruling was meant to stop drink companies from promoting their water as more healthy, when in reality, simple tap water is probably more effective. However, what I'll comment is that the world seems to be descending into big brother govt where they seem to want to regulate every bit of life. Which is guess is what the people are asking for as they get fooled by advertising gimmicks and sue/protest when they make stupid decisions. What happened to good old common sense? That's ridiculous. In layman's terms, water helps flush out your system, there is no way water is worse for doing that than water which already stuff in it. also, from the OP's spoiler "They applied for the right to state that “regular consumption of significant amounts of water can reduce the risk of development of dehydration” as well as preventing a decrease in performance." I don't like the fact someone tried to claim that. The moment you stop consuming, the risk is the same as it ever was. Well, that's where you have not got it right - water is not the best option for someone suffering from dehydration. It is even possible to kill yourself drinking too much water. So, in that sense, the experts have got it right. However, the need to make this kind of ruling to snuff out advertising gimmicks is a sad reflection on humanity and big brother govt. Anyways, for those not believing me: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/DehydrationRead the part about the treatment for dehydration, where in severe cases a balance of water and electrolytes is needed.
Why are we talking about treatment of dehydration anyway?
On that exact same wikipedia page, go to the "Prevention" section and right at the top it says "Dehydration is best avoided by drinking sufficient water." News Flash: The OP is talking about claims of preventing dehydration, not treating it.
Jesus Christ, I cant believe how many people here actually care so much about these insignificant technicalities. "Well aaaaaactuallly, water isnt the best treatment. You need water AND electrolytes." Are you fucking kidding me?
|
|
|
|
|
|
EPT
