EU bans claim that water can prevent dehydration

Reality Orlando

Verified Aquaculturalist
Joined
Aug 2, 2008
Messages
4,322
Reaction score
26
I wasn't sure where to put this but I guess this will work. What's REALLY bizarre is that it took a council of 21 scientists to come up with this gem:

"A meeting of 21 scientists in Parma, Italy, concluded that reduced water content in the body was a symptom of dehydration and not something that drinking water could subsequently control.
Now the EFSA verdict has been turned into an EU directive which was issued on Wednesday.
Ukip MEP Paul Nuttall said the ruling made the “bendy banana law” look “positively sane”.

...and we wonder why Europe is going broke.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/europe/eu/8897662/EU-bans-claim-that-water-can-prevent-dehydration.html
 
ROFLOL!! Someone was quoted as saying that the water/dehydration law made the "Bendy Banana Law" look sane. Had to check that one out, it's hilarious. What goes on in the minds of the people who pass these laws? Anything? Or, nothing? Or a combination of both.

:seeya: Hey to you lawmakers across the pond ... Stay there! :seeya:
 
Maybe it's like seatbelt laws ... intended to protect the stupid?
 
If I understand the article correctly, the final paragraphs actually get to the heart of the matter: the committee fears that because everyone knows water is related to dehydration, printing a special claim to that effect may make it appear that expensive bottled water does a better job of hydrating than cheap tap water (which would be, in fact, untrue).
 
What a joke and they are broke!
 
If I understand the article correctly, the final paragraphs actually get to the heart of the matter: the committee fears that because everyone knows water is related to dehydration, printing a special claim to that effect may make it appear that expensive bottled water does a better job of hydrating than cheap tap water (which would be, in fact, untrue).

And I've seen diet water, as well. I mean, seriously.

But the truth is that enhanced water, such as one that has electrolytes, does in fact treat dehydration better than pure water is true. But water, water, water is a good thing when you're dehydrated, whether it's expensive or tap.

I just can't believe the money that had to be spent on this study...just silly. And wasteful. And dehydrated the EU's accounts. Pity money doesn't flow in streams, right?

best-
Herding Cats
 
What a joke and they are broke!

The US and Europe are both in bad shape financially, but that doesn't seem to stop the wheels of absurd new legislation.

"Hey, America! The GOP is, yet again, looking out for you. This week, Congress took a break from voting to make sure none of your tax dollars will go to all those abortion clinics NPR wants to open in our national parks, to pass a federal law that only the nation that invented Febreze would tolerate.

They have affirmed that pizza is a vegetable"

Friday 18 November 2011

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentis...8/pizza-vegetable-congress-says-so?CMP=twt_gu

At least the EU is working with facts when they make new law.
 
The US and Europe are both in bad shape financially, but that doesn't seem to stop the wheels of absurd new legislation.

"Hey, America! The GOP is, yet again, looking out for you. This week, Congress took a break from voting to make sure none of your tax dollars will go to all those abortion clinics NPR wants to open in our national parks, to pass a federal law that only the nation that invented Febreze would tolerate.

They have affirmed that pizza is a vegetable"

Friday 18 November 2011

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentis...8/pizza-vegetable-congress-says-so?CMP=twt_gu

At least the EU is working with facts when they make new law.

Why is Congress even having that conversation? Why is anyone telling us what we should/shouldn't feed OUR kids? Parents are responsible for their children, not the government. It's a shame that is even an issue to be addressed! I packed my kids lunch most days so I could control what they ate. It was never "fancy" but it was nutritious. Government needs to back down and stop spending tax payer money on trying to control our lives.
 
...I just can't believe the money that had to be spent on this study...just silly. And wasteful. And dehydrated the EU's accounts. Pity money doesn't flow in streams, right?

best-
Herding Cats

I don't see a reference to how much was actually spent. Do we know?

The entire article seems heavily slanted to provoke indignation, IMO. It is structured to encourage one to assume that 21 scientists spent 3 years in full-time work on this issue, when it is more likely that those scientists are a standing committee and this was just one item on their ongoing agenda.

Yes, somebody probably had to do a comparison study of bottled water v. tap. But do we want government officials to make decisions on how to protect consumers WITHOUT first doing their homework?
 
Why is Congress even having that conversation? Why is anyone telling us what we should/shouldn't feed OUR kids? Parents are responsible for their children, not the government. It's a shame that is even an issue to be addressed! I packed my kids lunch most days so I could control what they ate. It was never "fancy" but it was nutritious. Government needs to back down and stop spending tax payer money on trying to control our lives.

Children are citizens of the nation, not private property. Why isn't providing information for their caretakers a proper function of government? (Nobody is forcing parents to feed kids one thing or another, though given our juvenile obesity and diabetes rates, maybe somebody should.)

More to the point, perhaps, the federal government actually purchases school lunches for low-income children. Surely it has an obligation to oversee what food it buys (an obligation that was ignored in this decision, I believe).
 
Children are citizens of the nation, not private property. Why isn't providing information for their caretakers a proper function of government? (Nobody is forcing parents to feed kids one thing or another, though given our juvenile obesity and diabetes rates, maybe somebody should.)

More to the point, perhaps, the federal government actually purchases school lunches for low-income children. Surely it has an obligation to oversee what food it buys (an obligation that was ignored in this decision, I believe).

My children are not government property.
 
My children are not government property.

Of course not. Nobody said they were.

But nor are they your property. And a little information isn't going to hurt you.

Unfortunately, Congress didn't produce accurate info this time. THAT is the problem, not that the government provides voluntary guidelines for parents or mandates nutritional balance in the meals it purchases for poor children.

You're complaining that the government did a job it did not in fact do.

And not to blame you personally, but in general this may be why we have a government that has ceased to function: instead of demanding government do well, we fall back on the cheap and easy resort of demanding government do nothing at all.
 
People did a fine job raising their kids all by themselves before government stepped in. Now look at the mess we have. Gangs, violence, suicides, rapes, murders, teenage pregnancies. What a fine job the government is doing...sure, keep those guidelines coming.
 
People did a fine job raising their kids all by themselves before government stepped in. Now look at the mess we have. Gangs, violence, suicides, rapes, murders, teenage pregnancies. What a fine job the government is doing...sure, keep those guidelines coming.

Before "government stepped in" to fund scientific research, people used to have a dozen or more children in the hope that a couple of kids would survive to adulthood. People had private cemeteries full of juvenile coffins in the backyard.

And children were quite commonly beaten, molested, starved and worked nearly to death as people did that "fine job" of raising their kids all by themselves. (I'm not saying these problems have all been solved, just that I'm glad we have government courts, prosecutors, police and social workers to deal with them, however imperfectly.)

For those who did live through the epidemics of measles, typhoid fever and consumption, life expectancy for most people was well under 40. Even lower for child-bearing women.

Ah, yes, the good old days before the government interfered!
 
Note to any Americans reading - when the Telegraph "reports" that the EU has done something unbelievably stupid, its probably not true. Incidentally, the same applies to stories in the Daily Mail about the politically correct "war on Christmas" - which should start to appear any day now. :rolleyes:
 
Before "government stepped in" to fund scientific research, people used to have a dozen or more children in the hope that a couple of kids would survive to adulthood. People had private cemeteries full of juvenile coffins in the backyard.

And children were quite commonly beaten, molested, starved and worked nearly to death as people did that "fine job" of raising their kids all by themselves. (I'm not saying these problems have all been solved, just that I'm glad we have government courts, prosecutors, police and social workers to deal with them, however imperfectly.)

For those who did live through the epidemics of measles, typhoid fever and consumption, life expectancy for most people was well under 40. Even lower for child-bearing women.

Ah, yes, the good old days before the government interfered!


You beat me to it, Nova. :)
The good old days of no child labor laws. How much fun those kids had!
 
Yeah, I don't get this romanticising of the good old days either. Gangs, murders, rapes, suicides - all that existed aplenty in the so called "good old days", we just know more about what goes on in this day and age.
 
Yeah, I don't get this romanticising of the good old days either. Gangs, murders, rapes, suicides - all that existed aplenty in the so called "good old days", we just know more about what goes on in this day and age.

Most of the time when people idealize the past, they seem to be thinking only of the 1950s. A great decade, perhaps, if you were a white, middle-class, heterosexual, adult male. Not so great for most everybody else.

But even then, the feds were hard at work telling parents what kids should eat: "The first USDA guidelines were published in 1894."

History of USDA nutrition guides - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
 
And anyway, the EU were right. Water isn't a panacea for dehydration, and bottled water companies have been engaging in false advertising whenever they have said otherwise. If water could cure dehydration, then hospitals wouldn't be messing around with expensive saline drips and salt based rehydration tablets. They'd just use tap water.

I also see this report was produced in February, so why are we suddenly hearing fake outrage in November? Must have been a slow news day.:rolleyes:
 

Members online

Online statistics

Members online
144
Guests online
2,476
Total visitors
2,620

Forum statistics

Threads
590,078
Messages
17,929,792
Members
228,059
Latest member
Alissa000ag
Back
Top