EU Bans Claim Water Prevents Dehydration

[Adam Jensen_v1legacy]

I think human stupidity finally reached the bottom. You can't get any dumber than this. Everybody knows that water eases the dehydration you fuckin' morons. Saying that it doesn't won't change the facts.

 

[Noswad]

News just in, more people taken in by an "isn't the EU stupid story" I thought everyone knew that these storys were rubbish, I mean for god sake the article quotes the straight banana story, which if you didn't consider complete rubbish first time round, you may have noticed that curved bananas still stock our supermarket shelves.

Oh and for those of you who didn't click on the link, you will discover that this story originated from the daily mail, sooooo yeah. Not wanting to offend anyone who reads it, but I'd double check everything I read there, especially articles concerning the EU.

It's such a shame, the EU is a massive movement in Global politics, sovereign nations slowly releasing there grip on power to a central authority. There are real issues to be discussed here, will the single currency survive, can Europe develop a single foreign policy and is the EU doing enough to be democratic, just to give a few examples and yet we still insist on getting bogged down in this shit.

Seriously whether your a Eurosceptic or a Europhile(real word, trust me) can we please just stop it.

 

[Treblaine]

WHAT BOLLOCKS! That's JUST THE SAME as saying if you don't eat enough food then you will starve... therefore food has nothing to do with preventing starvation!!!

Well, if you're so convinced, let's turn this into a science experiment. You drink bottled water, and then don't drink anything at all for a full week. If you're not experiencing any symptoms of dehydration by then, you win.

Yeah, I am pretty bloody convinced. That with the proper requirement of water I won't get dehydrated, not that any tiny amount of water will prevent dehydration for an indefinite length of time!

Your demand is the PRECISE OPPOSITE of the stated facts!

The bottle of water a week ago is TOTALLY IRRELEVANT to a week where all water is artificially removed from my diet that will surely speed dehydration. What insultingly backwards "science experiment", it's pure anti-science.

Saying "helps prevent dehydration" is NOT THE SAME as "will permanently prevent dehydration with one dose for a lifetime to the point where no other sources of hydration are ever needed".

 

[Treblaine]

News just in, more people taken in by an "isn't the EU stupid story" I thought everyone knew that these storys were rubbish, I mean for god sake the article quotes the straight banana story, which if you didn't consider complete rubbish first time round, you may have noticed that curved bananas still stock our supermarket shelves.

Oh and for those of you who didn't click on the link, you will discover that this story originated from the daily mail, sooooo yeah. Not wanting to offend anyone who reads it, but I'd double check everything I read there, especially articles concerning the EU.

It's such a shame, the EU is a massive movement in Global politics, sovereign nations slowly releasing there grip on power to a central authority. There are real issues to be discussed here, will the single currency survive, can Europe develop a single foreign policy and is the EU doing enough to be democratic, just to give a few examples and yet we still insist on getting bogged down in this shit.

Seriously whether your a Eurosceptic or a Europhile(real word, trust me) can we please just stop it.

In summary: shoot the messenger, guilty-by-association and change the subject.

"can we please just stop it."

Yes, stop the criticism. This undemocratic board taking our money and involving themselves in our state affairs are beyond public criticism or scrutiny[/sarc]

 

[Treblaine]

WHAT BOLLOCKS! That's JUST THE SAME as saying if you don't eat enough food then you will starve... therefore food has nothing to do with preventing starvation!!!

Well, if you're so convinced, let's turn this into a science experiment. You drink bottled water, and then don't drink anything at all for a full week. If you're not experiencing any symptoms of dehydration by then, you win.

Okay, next time you get an infection, only take your first dose of anti-biotics and then don't take anymore for a week. if your infection comes back, I win.

if you get cancer only go to your first chemo session and don't go for a month, if tthe cancer gets worse, I win.

if you are in severe and constant pain, just out of surgery for example (maybe after getting that cancer removed) only take pain meds for one day. if your pain comes back, I win.


dumb argument is dumb.

Welcome to the great euro-debate.

i-don't-want-to-live-on-this-continent-any-more.jpg

 

[Reishadowen]

[sarcasm]
Only in the EU
[/sarcasm]

I don't think any one country or group of countries have a monopoly on this kind of stupidity.

Tory MEP Roger Helmer said: ?This is stupidity writ large. The euro is burning, the EU is falling apart and yet here they are worrying about the obvious qualities of water. If ever there were an episode which demonstrates the folly of the great European project, then this is it.?

I think this quote here just about sums it up perfectly. As...absolutely face-slappingly stupefied as I was at this news, it's more of what we've already seen: bureaucratic BS taking over simple sense. But hey, maybe it's not so bad, maybe the news just got the whole thing a little too far out of proportion, and this really isn't all that-

The decision was being hailed as the daftest Brussels edict since the EU sent down laws on how bendy bananas should be.

...oh for f*ck's sake.

You know what? We're screwed. Whether it's because they're morons, or just doing everything they can to bury their heads in the sand and not deal with the bigger issues, we're just plain screwed either way.

Someone please tell me I'm wrong, I'd seriously be glad to hear it right now... -_-

 

[PhiMed]

Nonsense. You've berated everyone in this forum, asking for sources, and I don't think I've seen you provide a single one. It took me about 1 1/2 seconds to find this source. I googled "heat conditioning exercise physiology" and it was the very first link. If you had to search for hours, you're doing it wrong.

A truly intellectually curious conversant would've found this out for themselves. You're a sauce troll. You make claims without any knowledge of the subject, and without backing them up, and then demand sources from everyone who, correctly, calls you out when you're incorrect.

You just say what you believe to be true, and then when someone contradicts you, you ask them for a source, saying "it only makes sense." Try taking your own advice, guy.

Huh? At the centre of all my arguments is only the factual claim I have made is that water is hydrating...

Do I really need as source to back that up?!!?!?

If you would like specific sources I'll find them for you, just ask.

No factual claims?

I'm struggling to see how the EU possibly has a case here.

All the other times it was things like only certain bananas had a curviness standard, not your regular bog-standard simply labelled "bananas" type of banana.

But things like saying:

"It declared that shortage of water in the body was just a symptom of dehydration."

That's rather explicit, that seems far too bold faced a lie and if they really did say that that is outrageous to say the cause is a symptom. Symptoms are things like blurred vision, reduced mental clarity, change in urine colour, you know, indications of what is actually happening!

Drinking water doesn't help ease dehydration as much as you would think. You need salt along with the water. Plain water by itself could make things even worse for you.

I need to know the whole story on this one.

Except dehydration is separate from low blood-salinity, Hyponatremia. They may appear similar but they are distinct.

Dehydration IS a lack of water, introducing water DOES counter that. HYDRATION. You have to drink and sweat crazy amounts before hypoatremia becomes a problem.

In only 13% of top athletes who run triathlons experience technical Hypoatremia and they are consuming VAST amounts of water in hot climates, over long distances and have a very targeted glucose-intense diet that tends to cut out salt because... well... salt is bad for you, right?

Also Hyponatremia is very unlikely in the public considering how salty our diets our anyway, you can't get away from the high levels of salt in all our foods and the main mode of loss of sodium (the important part of salt) is when water is lost through sweating. How often do you sweat enough to soak your clothes all the way through?

Um... really?

Look, I agree that the EU is wrong here. I just pointed out that you were incorrect about the nature and incidence of hyponatremia, how it develops, in which groups it occurs, and why.

You responded by making air quotes at me when I used the phrase heat conditioning.

Kind of a dick move.

And telling people to cite things that can be looked up in less than 10 seconds is still pretty much the definition of intellectual laziness.

 

[Treblaine]

Nonsense. You've berated everyone in this forum, asking for sources, and I don't think I've seen you provide a single one. It took me about 1 1/2 seconds to find this source. I googled "heat conditioning exercise physiology" and it was the very first link. If you had to search for hours, you're doing it wrong.

A truly intellectually curious conversant would've found this out for themselves. You're a sauce troll. You make claims without any knowledge of the subject, and without backing them up, and then demand sources from everyone who, correctly, calls you out when you're incorrect.

You just say what you believe to be true, and then when someone contradicts you, you ask them for a source, saying "it only makes sense." Try taking your own advice, guy.

Huh? At the centre of all my arguments is only the factual claim I have made is that water is hydrating...

Do I really need as source to back that up?!!?!?

If you would like specific sources I'll find them for you, just ask.

No factual claims?

I'm struggling to see how the EU possibly has a case here.

All the other times it was things like only certain bananas had a curviness standard, not your regular bog-standard simply labelled "bananas" type of banana.

But things like saying:

"It declared that shortage of water in the body was just a symptom of dehydration."

That's rather explicit, that seems far too bold faced a lie and if they really did say that that is outrageous to say the cause is a symptom. Symptoms are things like blurred vision, reduced mental clarity, change in urine colour, you know, indications of what is actually happening!

Drinking water doesn't help ease dehydration as much as you would think. You need salt along with the water. Plain water by itself could make things even worse for you.

I need to know the whole story on this one.

Except dehydration is separate from low blood-salinity, Hyponatremia. They may appear similar but they are distinct.

Dehydration IS a lack of water, introducing water DOES counter that. HYDRATION. You have to drink and sweat crazy amounts before hypoatremia becomes a problem.

In only 13% of top athletes who run triathlons experience technical Hypoatremia and they are consuming VAST amounts of water in hot climates, over long distances and have a very targeted glucose-intense diet that tends to cut out salt because... well... salt is bad for you, right?

Also Hyponatremia is very unlikely in the public considering how salty our diets our anyway, you can't get away from the high levels of salt in all our foods and the main mode of loss of sodium (the important part of salt) is when water is lost through sweating. How often do you sweat enough to soak your clothes all the way through?

Um... really?

Look, I agree that the EU is wrong here. I just pointed out that you were incorrect about the nature and incidence of hyponatremia, how it develops, in which groups it occurs, and why.

You responded by making air quotes at me when I used the phrase heat conditioning.

Kind of a dick move.

And telling people to cite things that can be looked up in less than 10 seconds is still pretty much the definition of intellectual laziness.

"looked up in less than 10 seconds"

Earlier you said it took you (who knew just what you were looking for) a minute and a half, now it's under 10 seconds. Huh?

If you want the source of that empirical observation you only had to ask:

http://sportsmedicine.about.com/od/hydrationandfluid/a/Hyponatremia.htm

Anyway, hypoatremia is very tangential to the actual point of discussion, that is how under any circumstance the someone can consider it Illegal to state the fact that water helps prevent dehydration.

I didn't put Heat Conditioning in "air quotes" I put them in what are known simply as "quotes". I did so to clarify which particular term I was curious about. I had no idea anybody could be so sensitive about this. That is how quotation marks are used and nothing mean-spirited or callous is meant by them!

You seem to be blowing a lot of this out of proportion, like the "... well... salt is bad for you, right?" is clearly sardonic, not factual in an assertive way.

 

[Noswad]

News just in, more people taken in by an "isn't the EU stupid story" I thought everyone knew that these storys were rubbish, I mean for god sake the article quotes the straight banana story, which if you didn't consider complete rubbish first time round, you may have noticed that curved bananas still stock our supermarket shelves.

Oh and for those of you who didn't click on the link, you will discover that this story originated from the daily mail, sooooo yeah. Not wanting to offend anyone who reads it, but I'd double check everything I read there, especially articles concerning the EU.

It's such a shame, the EU is a massive movement in Global politics, sovereign nations slowly releasing there grip on power to a central authority. There are real issues to be discussed here, will the single currency survive, can Europe develop a single foreign policy and is the EU doing enough to be democratic, just to give a few examples and yet we still insist on getting bogged down in this shit.

Seriously whether your a Eurosceptic or a Europhile(real word, trust me) can we please just stop it.

In summary: shoot the messenger, guilty-by-association and change the subject.

"can we please just stop it."

Yes, stop the criticism. This undemocratic board taking our money and involving themselves in our state affairs are beyond public criticism or scrutiny[/sarc]

Hey, my way of saying is more fun and I didn't say not to criticize the EU, i meant actually criticize them about something important/true, like the lack of democracy like you mentioned.

 

[Treblaine]

News just in, more people taken in by an "isn't the EU stupid story" I thought everyone knew that these storys were rubbish, I mean for god sake the article quotes the straight banana story, which if you didn't consider complete rubbish first time round, you may have noticed that curved bananas still stock our supermarket shelves.

Oh and for those of you who didn't click on the link, you will discover that this story originated from the daily mail, sooooo yeah. Not wanting to offend anyone who reads it, but I'd double check everything I read there, especially articles concerning the EU.

It's such a shame, the EU is a massive movement in Global politics, sovereign nations slowly releasing there grip on power to a central authority. There are real issues to be discussed here, will the single currency survive, can Europe develop a single foreign policy and is the EU doing enough to be democratic, just to give a few examples and yet we still insist on getting bogged down in this shit.

Seriously whether your a Eurosceptic or a Europhile(real word, trust me) can we please just stop it.

In summary: shoot the messenger, guilty-by-association and change the subject.

"can we please just stop it."

Yes, stop the criticism. This undemocratic board taking our money and involving themselves in our state affairs are beyond public criticism or scrutiny[/sarc]

Hey, my way of saying is more fun and I didn't say not to criticize the EU, i meant actually criticize them about something important/true, like the lack of democracy like you mentioned.

Well they do present themselves as if they are in an unassailable position of "well, what would you do without us?", things like this just plant the idea in the minds of the public of "hmm, maybe The EU isn't all right on a fundamental level".

This case though, shows how inflexible EU is on their sacred cows. They have made great efforts in combating charlatans that sell rare foods as snake oil to cure cancers or other diseases, but so sure were they they rashly decreed that no food or beverage can be claimed to cure a diseases. This was an anti-scientific thing to say as some beverages do technically cure some diseases, the most poignant one being water against the disease of dehydration.

The EU based their offensive against the snake oil salesmen on poor foundation, now they are too arrogant to amend their mistake. And after 3 years and wasting the time of 21 academics they couldn't just amend the rules because it's kinda hard to amend the rules. That's bringing up the issue of legislation and that's the burning issue of democracy in the EU... and what the hell is the EU? Is it a super state? Or is it an overgrown steel trading board that does nothing but write post-it notes that member states value too much.

Why in the world should the EU want a single foreign policy, the military obligations and needs of Britain are completely separate from the military needs of Greece. In another case like the Falklands do we have to get the opinion of France, Germany, Belgium, Greece, etc, etc on that?

 

[James Raynor]

http://www.guardian.co.uk/science/the-lay-scientist/2011/nov/18/1?newsfeed=true

http://eur-lex.europa.eu/LexUriServ/LexUriServ.do?uri=OJ:L:2011:296:0026:0028:ENDF


So many people that have no clue what they're talking about acts like the EU is in the wrong for doing this.

 

[PhiMed]

Nonsense. You've berated everyone in this forum, asking for sources, and I don't think I've seen you provide a single one. It took me about 1 1/2 seconds to find this source. I googled "heat conditioning exercise physiology" and it was the very first link. If you had to search for hours, you're doing it wrong.

A truly intellectually curious conversant would've found this out for themselves. You're a sauce troll. You make claims without any knowledge of the subject, and without backing them up, and then demand sources from everyone who, correctly, calls you out when you're incorrect.

You just say what you believe to be true, and then when someone contradicts you, you ask them for a source, saying "it only makes sense." Try taking your own advice, guy.

Huh? At the centre of all my arguments is only the factual claim I have made is that water is hydrating...

Do I really need as source to back that up?!!?!?

If you would like specific sources I'll find them for you, just ask.

No factual claims?

I'm struggling to see how the EU possibly has a case here.

All the other times it was things like only certain bananas had a curviness standard, not your regular bog-standard simply labelled "bananas" type of banana.

But things like saying:

"It declared that shortage of water in the body was just a symptom of dehydration."

That's rather explicit, that seems far too bold faced a lie and if they really did say that that is outrageous to say the cause is a symptom. Symptoms are things like blurred vision, reduced mental clarity, change in urine colour, you know, indications of what is actually happening!

Drinking water doesn't help ease dehydration as much as you would think. You need salt along with the water. Plain water by itself could make things even worse for you.

I need to know the whole story on this one.

Except dehydration is separate from low blood-salinity, Hyponatremia. They may appear similar but they are distinct.

Dehydration IS a lack of water, introducing water DOES counter that. HYDRATION. You have to drink and sweat crazy amounts before hypoatremia becomes a problem.

In only 13% of top athletes who run triathlons experience technical Hypoatremia and they are consuming VAST amounts of water in hot climates, over long distances and have a very targeted glucose-intense diet that tends to cut out salt because... well... salt is bad for you, right?

Also Hyponatremia is very unlikely in the public considering how salty our diets our anyway, you can't get away from the high levels of salt in all our foods and the main mode of loss of sodium (the important part of salt) is when water is lost through sweating. How often do you sweat enough to soak your clothes all the way through?

Um... really?

Look, I agree that the EU is wrong here. I just pointed out that you were incorrect about the nature and incidence of hyponatremia, how it develops, in which groups it occurs, and why.

You responded by making air quotes at me when I used the phrase heat conditioning.

Kind of a dick move.

And telling people to cite things that can be looked up in less than 10 seconds is still pretty much the definition of intellectual laziness.

"looked up in less than 10 seconds"

Earlier you said it took you (who knew just what you were looking for) a minute and a half, now it's under 10 seconds. Huh?

If you want the source of that empirical observation you only had to ask:

http://sportsmedicine.about.com/od/hydrationandfluid/a/Hyponatremia.htm

Anyway, hypoatremia is very tangential to the actual point of discussion, that is how under any circumstance the someone can consider it Illegal to state the fact that water helps prevent dehydration.

I didn't put Heat Conditioning in "air quotes" I put them in what are known simply as "quotes". I did so to clarify which particular term I was curious about. I had no idea anybody could be so sensitive about this. That is how quotation marks are used and nothing mean-spirited or callous is meant by them!

You seem to be blowing a lot of this out of proportion, like the "... well... salt is bad for you, right?" is clearly sardonic, not factual in an assertive way.

Actually, I said a second and a half, which is... wait, let me pull out my abacus... yes... less than 10 seconds.

You express yourself in a very confrontational manner in forums. I'm not the first person to take issue with your tone.

You can pretend that putting a previously asserted phenomenon in quotation marks doesn't implicitly question its existence, but that just makes you look like you're blissfully ignorant of the impression you give.

I don't believe that. I think you know exactly what you're doing, which is why I'm done feeding you, troll.

Later.

 

[Fluffythepoo]

People make stupid laws when rich people are paying them alot of money to make those stupid laws

 

[Vegosiux]

I think human stupidity finally reached the bottom. You can't get any dumber than this. Everybody knows that water eases the dehydration you fuckin' morons. Saying that it doesn't won't change the facts.

If that's the case, then such a sales pitch is slightly redundant in the first place, isn't it?

And of course water helps hydrate, nobody is denying that. Nobody's even forbidding you from saying that. You merely can't use it as a sales pitch. Which, if you use your head for a second or two, makes perfect sense.

But as for it preventing dehydration? When did we turn into camels? Really, you can't "stock up" with water in your system, the excess won't get stored for later use, it will be promptly disposed of via the bladder.

 

[vrbtny]

At first i read the thread title as "EU claims Water prevents Dehydration" and was all ready to use my new gif.

Then I actually read the OP and was more

 

[NLS]

I'm getting tired of these "news" that are one sided and don't provide a good view on the matter before people go all apeshit about things.
This is meant to cripple companies that sell water for insane amounts of money and claim it to be a miracle cure for everything. The water from your tap is just as good. This isn't meant as a "oooh, water is bad for you".

 

[MelasZepheos_v1legacy]

Someone's already said this but I'll say it again.

It's about false marketing, not about what water does or doesn't do.

Marketers will claim anything that is 'true' even if it should be self-evident. An advertiser will put 'Asbestos-free' on cereal if they think it will sell more (and it will.) Technically no cereal has asbestos, so the claim is true, but the marketing campaign is making it sound like other cereals will have asbestos, but since theirs doesn't, you should buy it!

As I understand it, what this law will do is stop people from selling the sorts of 'new miracle cure-alls' when really the only ingredient is water.

And as a side note, if you aren't intelligent enough to know that water will stop you from being dehydrated then you are truly stupid.

 

[Vegosiux]

And as a side note, if you aren't intelligent enough to know that water will stop you from being dehydrated then you are truly stupid.

Problem is, it doesn't proactively stop you from being dehydrated. We're not camels.