Together, we can find a cure



  • ...for dehydration.

    Because we don't have one yet.

    [url]http://www.dailymail.co.uk/health/article-2065204/Dehydration-EU-says-CANT-claim-drinking-water-stops-body-drying-out.html[/url]

    :(



  • According to the US Congress, pizza can cure dehydration.



  • Oh, they're just being pedantic dickweeds.  Of course it doesn't stop dehydration.  On the contrary, it enables the process of "drying out" to continue for decades.



  • @frits said:

    Oh, they're just being pedantic dickweeds.  Of course it doesn't stop dehydration.  On the contrary, it enables the process of "drying out" to continue for decades.

    It's a bit more involved than that. Dehydration (a medical condition) can stem from a multitude of causes, among them, of course the simple lack of water.

    BUT dehydration can also be caused by other factors which drinking water, or the wrong kind of water, won't solve or prevent.

    As a simple example, it's not healthy to drink salt water or distilled water. Drinking too much water ain't healthy either.

    Simply put, they're not allowed to claim that their water is a) a solution for a medical condition (it's not a drug, folks!), nor b) that it's especially efficient compared to other sources of water.
    Especially in the light of the fact that tap water over here in Germany (and probably several other places in Europe) is sometimes of better quality than the bottled water they want to sell you.



  • Solution: drink vodka



  • @Rhywden said:

    Drinking too much water ain't healthy either.

    The article clearly indicates that advertisers can claim that drinking water is healthy for you! Who are you to go against the mighty European Union?!?



  • @Rhywden said:

    @frits said:

    Oh, they're just being pedantic dickweeds.  Of course it doesn't stop dehydration.  On the contrary, it enables the process of "drying out" to continue for decades.

    It's a bit more involved than that.

     

    Yeah. I love calling them bureaucratic panty waste as much as every one else, but this would just have given water bottling firms -- you know, the types that take a liter of water for free out of the ground and charge you $2.50 for it; types that make consultants look like decent guy -- the possibility to stick a medical claim onto the bottle. The risks greatly outweigh the advantages here.



  • @TGV said:

    [quote user="Rhywden"][quote user="frits"]

    Oh, they're just being pedantic dickweeds.  Of course it doesn't stop dehydration.  On the contrary, it enables the process of "drying out" to continue for decades.

    It's a bit more involved than that.

    [/quote] 

    Yeah. I love calling them bureaucratic panty waste as much as every one else, but this would just have given water bottling firms -- you know, the types that take a liter of water for free out of the ground and charge you $2.50 for it; types that make consultants look like decent guy -- the possibility to stick a medical claim onto the bottle. The risks greatly outweigh the advantages here.

    [/quote]

    The risk-vs-advantage picture looks more like oh my god nobody cares. and you wonder where your tax money goes to. this is why we can't have nice things anymore.



  • Despite appearances, this is actually an outbreak of common sense. Could you imagine what marketers would inflict on us if they could make actual health claims on bottles of water? The insanity could kill.
    Remember, these are people who claimed that a moisturising night cream was "anti-aging" because it contained sunscreen.



  • @robbak said:

    Despite appearances, this is actually an outbreak of common sense. Could you imagine what marketers would inflict on us if they could make actual health claims on bottles of water? The insanity could kill.
    Remember, these are people who claimed that a moisturising night cream was "anti-aging" because it contained sunscreen.

    Yeah, but too much details kills details... that make this "law" inapplicable in any other case. So if some day a bottle of water claim "reduce thirst sensation" (not completly wrong, but not completly true neither, it will need a specific law to be illegal. Actually in most of european countries there is law(s) which prevent that kind of thing, like "false advertising"; so I don't see the point of this law...

     

    Who said european leaders don't care about real problems? greek and italian people probably...



  • @TGV said:

    @Rhywden said:

    @frits said:

    Oh, they're just being pedantic dickweeds.  Of course it doesn't stop dehydration.  On the contrary, it enables the process of "drying out" to continue for decades.

    It's a bit more involved than that.

     

    Yeah. I love calling them bureaucratic panty waste as much as every one else, but this would just have given water bottling firms -- you know, the types that take a liter of water for free out of the ground tap and charge you $2.50 for it; types that make consultants look like decent guy -- the possibility to stick a medical claim onto the bottle. The risks greatly outweigh the advantages here.

    FTFY.

    (It's not 'free' to take it out of the ground either, building and operating a well is quite expensive.)



  •  Taking ANYTHING written in the Daily Mail at face value is foolish in the extreme. After all, the article even includes the 'bendy bananas' nonsense as a reason to criticise the EU, which was debunked years ago. Reading the article carefully, what appears to have happened is that someone asked for a ruling on a specific advertising claim he said he wished to place on a bottle of water, and the ruling came back that it would not be allowed. No new laws or regulations are involved here, just an advisory on wether this claim is allowed under existing laws.

     Of course, nowhere in the article does it actually tell you precisely what this proposed claim was, just that it involved something to do with water and dehydration.For all we know, he could have been claiming that this specific brand of water is the only way to cure dehydration.





  • @Malenfant said:

    Of course, nowhere in the article does it actually tell you precisely what this proposed claim was

    @the article, a bit over half way down said:
    The statement on which the eminent EU experts ruled claimed that ‘regular consumption of significant amounts of water can reduce the risk of development of dehydration and of concomitant decrease of performance.’

    Interesting links there, fatbull. A quick summary for the less motivated: To claim that a product reduces the risk of developing a condition, you legally have to show that it decreases a risk factor for that condition. A risk factor is something that causes you to have a higher chance of developing the condition than someone without the risk factor. The panel asked the applicant which risk factor they had in mind. The applicant suggested "water loss in tissues" or "reduced water content in tissues" as risk factors. However, the panel said that these are not risk factors for dehydration , but rather symptoms of dehydration; having reduced water content in your tissues doesn't mean that you are more likely to become dehydrated in the future, it means you are dehydrated now. So water is perhaps a treatment for dehydration (though presumably such a claim would require its own set of evidence) but doesn't fit the criteria for reducing the risk of developing dehydration.



  • For your consideration, I quote one of the commenters on the article:

    Congratulations STEVE DOUGHTY and CLAIRE BATES for ridiculing the EU for this conclusion and avoiding real facts or science. Maybe I am being harsh. It does say in the headline that water doesn't prevent dehydration. I am sure health writers of your caliber understand this subject thoroughly, but if you don't mind I feel the need to cast aside your veil of Euro-skepticism to explain to any readers who may be confused. Water doesn't prevent dehydration. At least not on it's own. Your body will only retain water if you have adequate salt intake. Without enough salt, your body will merrily process that bottle of Evian and you'll loose as much water through urination as you're taking on.
    • Rorie, Stroud, Gloucestershire, 23/11/2011 17:51

    And for what it's worth, as long as the media won't name the actual ruling this whole argument is moot. Once again, the press excessively quotes bystanders instead of the actual ruling. They also omit the fact that dehydration is in fact a disease and as such it falls to your physician to make any ruling about your diet (not your soft drink company).


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @fatbull said:

    The proposed claim was:

    Regular consumption of significant amounts of water can reduce the risk of development of dehydration and of concomitant decrease of performance.

    Source:

    I covered something similar about Powerade ION4 back in March. (Shameless plug: <a href="http://advertisingbollocks.blogspot.com/2011/03/powerade-ion4-making-you-wetter-than.html>Powerade ION4 - making you wetter than a wet thing in lots of wet stuff.)



    Their claim:

    Powerade ION4, hydrates better than water.

    My conclusion:

    Or you could just drink [plain] water and, possibly, eat a packet of salt and vinegar crisps. Doing both, of course will also "hydrate you better than water (alone.) [And is a damn sight cheaper than buying ION4]"


  • Logically, there's an even simpler solution: if you're dehydrated, just drink salt water! And the best part is there's tons of the stuff all over the place.


  • Discourse touched me in a no-no place

    @DaveK said:

    (It's not 'free' to take it out of the ground either, building and operating a well is quite expensive.)
    You think this stuff comes out of wells? That's precious.

     

    There's a bottled water plant for one of the major manufactuers in Baltimore City producing "spring water". It's connected to the city water supply. This is not an abnormal arrangement.



  • @Shortjob said:

    For your consideration, I quote one of the commenters on the article:

    @Another commenter on the DM said:

    It is obvious that those eurocrats in Brussels,
    Flemings and Walloons
    (probably with a mix of others) cannot understand
    English though they may attempt to ‘regular consumption of significant
    amounts of water can reduce the risk of development of dehydration and
    of concomitant decrease of performance.’ ....<snip>...
    Isn't it about time that these idiots, who steal our money, shown the
    door and path to the dole queue?
    PATHETIC

    - sid, Peterborough, England, 23/11/2011

    Do people in the UK actually believe that European laws are dictated and voted by Belgians only (Flemish and Walloons) because the parliament is in the Belgian capital? Priceless



     



  • @bjolling said:

    Do people in the UK actually believe that European laws are dictated and voted by Belgians only (Flemish and Walloons) because the parliament is in the Belgian capital? Priceless

    Not all of them, but it doesn't surprise me in a comment on the Daily Fail's website.


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.