It's not a medicinal benefit to be nutritious.seraphy said:Ahh and now you are doing same thing as these people. There are always loopholes in rules if you dig deep enough.Treblaine said:No, the rules have always been there - poorly worded as they are - they simply asked them to clarify what would and would not be legal, rather than go out and say it risking massive fines or even prison sentences. EU brought about the obfuscation and these academics demanded clarification. EU made themselves look bad.
"But obviously EU can't allow something like this to happen."
Yes, can't possibly have someone state the scientific fact that consuming water helps counter dehydration.
They had all sorts of silly reasons like "well that would mean that beer is hydrating" when IT IS! Sorry if they don't like that fact that there might be some slim benefit of consuming and alcoholic beverage, even when they are informed of the associated health risks. That is no reason to suppress scientific facts.
Would it be against these rules to put words say "stay hydrated" in water bottle? I think not.
It's different thing altogether to claim that there is some huge medicinal benefit in your bottled water. Certainly you or anyone else should understand that these rules were not made for cases like this.
I'll just say that we must agree to disagree here.
Lack of any nutrient can be a disease, that doesn't suddenly turn said nutrient into a medicine. Requiring all medicinal standards.
It's not a huge medical benefit to that water replenishes the human need for water! And what is this straw man of bottled water, this agreement is on ALL WATER. Everywhere, you can't claim that any water has any affect on dehydration. As if dehydration defined as a disease makes it a sacred cow only for the medical establishment to have any stake on. Are you saying that there should be MEDICINAL WATER on hand for in case of dehydration?
"I'll just say that we must agree to disagree here."
I always hate it when people say that, as if disagreement is the only option other than for example seriously considering my side of the argument, this just acts like your are ignoring it as "disagreement"