Water does not prevent dehydration

[Col. Crackpot]

link

EU bans claim that water can prevent dehydration
Brussels bureaucrats were ridiculed yesterday after banning drink manufacturers from claiming that water can prevent dehydration.
Brussels bureaucrats were ridiculed yesterday after banning drink manufacturers from claiming that water can prevent dehydration.
NHS health guidelines state clearly that drinking water helps avoid dehydration, and that Britons should drink at least 1.2 litres per day Photo: ALAMY

By Victoria Ward and Nick Collins

6:20AM GMT 18 Nov 2011

Comments1119 Comments

EU officials concluded that, following a three-year investigation, there was no evidence to prove the previously undisputed fact.

Producers of bottled water are now forbidden by law from making the claim and will face a two-year jail sentence if they defy the edict, which comes into force in the UK next month.

Last night, critics claimed the EU was at odds with both science and common sense. Conservative MEP Roger Helmer said: “This is stupidity writ large.

“The euro is burning, the EU is falling apart and yet here they are: highly-paid, highly-pensioned officials worrying about the obvious qualities of water and trying to deny us the right to say what is patently true.

“If ever there were an episode which demonstrates the folly of the great European project then this is it.”
Related Articles

Advice to drink eight glasses of water daily 'nonsense'
13 Jul 2011

Dehydration makes young brains inefficient
16 May 2010

NHS health guidelines state clearly that drinking water helps avoid dehydration, and that Britons should drink at least 1.2 litres per day.

The Department for Health disputed the wisdom of the new law. A spokesman said: “Of course water hydrates. While we support the EU in preventing false claims about products, we need to exercise common sense as far as possible."

German professors Dr Andreas Hahn and Dr Moritz Hagenmeyer, who advise food manufacturers on how to advertise their products, asked the European Commission if the claim could be made on labels.

They compiled what they assumed was an uncontroversial statement in order to test new laws which allow products to claim they can reduce the risk of disease, subject to EU approval.

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.

However, last February, the European Food Standards Authority (EFSA) refused to approve the statement.

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”.

He said: “I had to read this four or five times before I believed it. It is a perfect example of what Brussels does best. Spend three years, with 20 separate pieces of correspondence before summoning 21 professors to Parma where they decide with great solemnity that drinking water cannot be sold as a way to combat dehydration.

“Then they make this judgment law and make it clear that if anybody dares sell water claiming that it is effective against dehydration they could get into serious legal bother.

EU regulations, which aim to uphold food standards across member states, are frequently criticised.

Rules banning bent bananas and curved cucumbers were scrapped in 2008 after causing international ridicule.

Prof Hahn, from the Institute for Food Science and Human Nutrition at Hanover Leibniz University, said the European Commission had made another mistake with its latest ruling.

“What is our reaction to the outcome? Let us put it this way: We are neither surprised nor delighted.

“The European Commission is wrong; it should have authorised the claim. That should be more than clear to anyone who has consumed water in the past, and who has not? We fear there is something wrong in the state of Europe.”

Prof Brian Ratcliffe, spokesman for the Nutrition Society, said dehydration was usually caused by a clinical condition and that one could remain adequately hydrated without drinking water.

He said: “The EU is saying that this does not reduce the risk of dehydration and that is correct.

“This claim is trying to imply that there is something special about bottled water which is not a reasonable claim.”

I'm sorry, but this has to be the most amazing bit of stupidity i have read in quite some time. Comments anyone?

[Teebs]

It's from the Telegraph, which is notoriously anti-EU and I've heard enough EU myths which have turned out to be bullshit not to trust things like that.

[Serafina]

I haven't yet looked into this particular one, but EU-regulations are CONSTANTLY being misreported and the resulting strawmen ridiculed. Almost all the time, the actual regulation turns out to be sensible.

For example, german media recently reported that the EU had banned the sale of balloons to children under a certain age (i think it was 5), with resulting jail sentences and fines if a shop did it anyway. They had done no such thing, instead the regulation stated that balloons had to have a warning label that they might be dangerous to children under a certain age (e.g. by swallowing or putting them over their head)- something like that is already done for plenty of toys, mostly those containing small parts, and is merely to inform the customers without any restriction for sales.


And even if we take the claims in the article at face value, the only thing that happened here is that the producers of bottled water are not allowed to advertise with the claim that their product prevents dehydration. Which is quite sensible, as it prevents them from suggesting that their product is better at doing that than any other type of water (such as tap water, which is often higher in quality as bottled water within the EU), or that specifically drinking water instead of other fluids (fruit juices for example) is necessary to stay hydrated. Both claims ARE patently false, so why should companies be allowed to make them (even if it's just via suggestion instead of explicit statement)?

Without this regulation, bottled water could come with the boldly-printed statement "Protects you from Dehydration!", along with TV-ads that show how horrible dehydration is and how it is cured by drinking "Brand"-bottled water (say, an elderly woman in a retirement home suffering from dehydration until her kind grandchild bring her "Brand"-water). I really fail to see how this is a good thing.

The most likely thing that happened here is that The Telegraph just omitted the word "bottled" from the statement of the scientist and in other instances.

[kc8tbe]

I don't know the details of the EU decision, but it's worth noting that water does not cure dehydration due to all causes. For example, if you have diarrhea, then your intestines may not effectively absorb pure water, and you will probably need pedialyte or rice water to prevent dehydration. Or, if you're a severe burn victim, then you need to go to a hospital and receive immediate treatment rather than chug bottled water and assume you'll be OK.

[NoXion]

1.2 liters of water a day? That sounds like an awful lot, I'm pretty sure I don't drink that much, even if I were to include non-water fluids. Are they including water in food?

I don't know the details of the EU decision, but it's worth noting that water does not cure dehydration due to all causes. For example, if you have diarrhea, then your intestines may not effectively absorb pure water, and you will probably need pedialyte or rice water to prevent dehydration. Or, if you're a severe burn victim, then you need to go to a hospital and receive immediate treatment rather than chug bottled water and assume you'll be OK.

What have severe burns got to do with dehydration?

[kc8tbe]

One of your skin's functions is to retain water. If you remove skin (commonly via a 3rd degree burn) from a large portion of the body, rapid water loss becomes inevitable. Google "Lactated Ringer".

[Korvan]

1.2 liters of water a day? That sounds like an awful lot, I'm pretty sure I don't drink that much, even if I were to include non-water fluids. Are they including water in food?

I believe that the bottled water companies deliberately do not include water content in food, which is substantial. If you're healthy, you can pretty much just drink when you're thirsty and be perfectly fine. And when you do drink, just make it tap water (filtered or not) assuming your community's tap water is potable which is usually the case in North America. I'm boggled at the number of supposedly intelligent university students who buy bottled water when close by to the vending machines is a machine that fills your reusable water bottle for free with filtered, UV treated water that is of higher quality than the branded water. Good on the Student Union for providing the free water dispenser. Even if you're like me and can never remember to bring a bottle with you, the campus has tons of free water fountains and with the backlash against branded water, the fountains have had their water pressure restored to reasonable levels.

Call me paranoid, but I do remember when branded water first hit the stage, a whole lot of water fountains lost almost all pressure and would only give out a dribble.

[Bakustra]

Let's see what the EFSA has to say about this:

Following an application from Prof. Dr. Moritz Hagenmeyer and Prof. Dr. Andreas Hahn, submitted pursuant to Article 14 of Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 via the Competent Authority of Germany, the Panel on Dietetic Products, Nutrition and Allergies was asked to deliver an opinion on the scientific substantiation of a health claim related to water and reduced risk of development of dehydration and of concomitant decrease of performance.

The scope of the application was proposed to fall under a health claim referring to disease risk reduction.

The food that is the subject of the health claim is water. The Panel considers that water is sufficiently characterised.

The claimed effect is “regular consumption of significant amounts of water can reduce the risk of development of dehydration and of concomitant decrease of performance”. The Panel assumes that the target population is the general population.

The Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006 defines reduction of disease risk claims as claims which state that the consumption of a food “significantly reduces a risk factor in the development of a human disease”. Thus, for reduction of disease risk claims, the beneficial physiological effect (which the Regulation requires to be shown for the claim to be permitted) results from the reduction of a risk factor for the development of a human disease.

The Panel notes that dehydration was identified as the disease by the applicant. Dehydration is a condition of body water depletion. Upon request for clarification on the risk factor, the applicant proposed “water loss in tissues” or “reduced water content in tissues” as risk factors, the reduction of which was proposed to lead to a reduction of the risk of development of dehydration. The Panel notes that the proposed risk factors are measures of water depletion and thus are measures of the disease (dehydration).

The Panel considers that 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.

The reason that they disqualified this is because the regulations require that the food product be capable of averting risk factors. The proposed risk factors for dehydration were depletion/low levels of water in bodily tissues, which are part of the definition of dehydration. They can't really be considered "risk factors" for the disease of dehydration, and so water can't be labeled as preventing dehydration, because it's a treatment for it. You could label it as a dehydration treatment, probably (though with the necessary caveats that kc8tbe provided above), but reasonable risk factors for dehydration are either physiological (like intestinal or skin problems) or lifestyle (like not accumulating enough water in your diet), and you can't say that water can be used to avert these risk factors. So this doesn't say that "water does nothing to treat dehydration", it says that, technically speaking, water is an important treatment for dehydration and can't be labeled as a deterrent to dehydration. So it's actually reasonable. Chalk one up for Eurosceptics willfully declaring the EU to be "dumb and so goddamn crazy".

EDIT: From a response by the EFSA:

It should be noted that the NDA Panel has positively evaluated a general function claim on water and maintenance of normal physical and mental performance5.

[CaptainChewbacca]

Well, can the bottles say 'MAY help to alleviate dehydration' ?

[Minischoles]

Typical Telegraph over-reaction to something minor - full of hyperbolic language and quotes from MEPs who are rabidly anti-EU.

If it helps, think of papers like this as a Fox News equivalent, but instead of screeching about Obama they find every little thing the EU does and screech about it in whatever uninformed fashion they can.

[Stark]

Well, can the bottles say 'MAY help to alleviate dehydration' ?

I'm pretty sure it'd be fine if it said 'provides hydration', like any number of disgusting sports drinks. Their problem is that 'dehydration' can have a clinical meaning which is not what is generally understood by 'need to drink some more water, bro'.

[Starglider]

Typical Telegraph over-reaction to something minor - full of hyperbolic language and quotes from MEPs who are rabidly anti-EU. If it helps, think of papers like this as a Fox News equivalent, but instead of screeching about Obama they find every little thing the EU does and screech about it in whatever uninformed fashion they can.

I'm fine with that. The general population don't have the interest or education to comprehend the economic and political folly of the EU, and it's difficult to convey its inherent waste, corruption, dysfunctionality and anti-democratic conceit in catchy soundbites. Those silly regulation stories probably helped the UK avoid being a front-row participant in the euro implosion nightmare.

[PainRack]

1.2 liters of water a day? That sounds like an awful lot, I'm pretty sure I don't drink that much, even if I were to include non-water fluids. Are they including water in food?

I just learnt some new niffy stuff. Recommended water intake is 30ml/kg/day H2O. So, if you have an average weight of 70kg, you need 2.1liters worth.

What have severe burns got to do with dehydration?

Google Hartman formula.

Back to mugging now:D

[Shroom Man 777]

I don't know the details of the EU decision, but it's worth noting that water does not cure dehydration due to all causes. For example, if you have diarrhea, then your intestines may not effectively absorb pure water, and you will probably need pedialyte or rice water to prevent dehydration. Or, if you're a severe burn victim, then you need to go to a hospital and receive immediate treatment rather than chug bottled water and assume you'll be OK.

What have severe burns got to do with dehydration?

The skin keeps water inside the body. When the skin is burned off, exposing the stuff underneath it, the body's water will be able to leave through the exposed regions via evaporation. Also, bodily fluids can go from the plasma and into the damaged areas and other places where they aren't supposed to be, while the rest of the body can be dehydrated because of the shift in fluid volume.

[Lord Zentei]

I don't know the details of the EU decision, but it's worth noting that water does not cure dehydration due to all causes. For example, if you have diarrhea, then your intestines may not effectively absorb pure water, and you will probably need pedialyte or rice water to prevent dehydration. Or, if you're a severe burn victim, then you need to go to a hospital and receive immediate treatment rather than chug bottled water and assume you'll be OK.

Seems to me that you would have to be a complete fucking retard to think that burn victims would just need to chug water to be OK, but I guess it takes all kinds, since lawnmowers apparently have labels on them informing people that sticking your hand into the swirling blades is bad for you.

[dragon]

1.2 liters of water a day? That sounds like an awful lot, I'm pretty sure I don't drink that much, even if I were to include non-water fluids. Are they including water in food?

I don't know the details of the EU decision, but it's worth noting that water does not cure dehydration due to all causes. For example, if you have diarrhea, then your intestines may not effectively absorb pure water, and you will probably need pedialyte or rice water to prevent dehydration. Or, if you're a severe burn victim, then you need to go to a hospital and receive immediate treatment rather than chug bottled water and assume you'll be OK.

What have severe burns got to do with dehydration?

There 33.8oz per liter

[evilsoup]

Typical Telegraph over-reaction to something minor - full of hyperbolic language and quotes from MEPs who are rabidly anti-EU. If it helps, think of papers like this as a Fox News equivalent, but instead of screeching about Obama they find every little thing the EU does and screech about it in whatever uninformed fashion they can.

I'm fine with that. The general population don't have the interest or education to comprehend the economic and political folly of the EU, and it's difficult to convey its inherent waste, corruption, dysfunctionality and anti-democratic conceit in catchy soundbites. Those silly regulation stories probably helped the UK avoid being a front-row participant in the euro implosion nightmare.

How can you decry the EU for being anti-democratic in the same breath as this crypto-fascist crap? 'People are too stupid to understand that the EU is undemocratic, therefore we should lie to them'

[Raw Shark]

1.2 liters of water a day? That sounds like an awful lot, I'm pretty sure I don't drink that much, even if I were to include non-water fluids. Are they including water in food?

It depends on where you live and what you're eating, mostly. I have to drink a lot more water here in dry, high-altitude Denver (easily 1.5L+/day) than I did back at humid, coastal sea level to avoid things like nosebleeds, headaches, and cracked, bleeding hands, and most people here (including myself) eat more watery fruits and vegetables than I was used to back east.

[Shroom Man 777]

I don't know the details of the EU decision, but it's worth noting that water does not cure dehydration due to all causes. For example, if you have diarrhea, then your intestines may not effectively absorb pure water, and you will probably need pedialyte or rice water to prevent dehydration. Or, if you're a severe burn victim, then you need to go to a hospital and receive immediate treatment rather than chug bottled water and assume you'll be OK.

They usually need to be chugged water intravenously. The water tends to have electrolytes and shit too.

[D.Turtle]

I just learnt some new niffy stuff. Recommended water intake is 30ml/kg/day H2O. So, if you have an average weight of 70kg, you need 2.1liters worth.

That seems WAY too high. AFAIK the you need to drink X amount of water a day is mostly a myth.

Here's the snopes.com article about it:

Eight Glasses

Claim: The average person needs to drink eight glasses of water per day to avoid being "chronically dehydrated."

Status: False.

In general, to remain healthy we need to take in enough water to replace the amount we lose daily through excretion, perspiration, and other bodily functions, but that amount can vary widely from person to person, based upon a variety of factors such as age, physical condition, activity level, and climate. The "8-10 glasses of water per day" is a rule of thumb, not an absolute minimum, and not all of our water intake need come in the form of drinking water.

The origins of the 8-10 glasses per day figure remain elusive. As a Los Angeles Times article on the subject reported:
Consider that first commandment of good health: Drink at least eight 8-ounce glasses of water a day. This unquestioned rule is itself a question mark. Most nutritionists have no idea where it comes from. "I can't even tell you that," says Barbara Rolls, a nutrition researcher at Pennsylvania State University, "and I've written a book on water."

Some say the number was derived from fluid intake measurements taken decades ago among hospital patients on IVs; others say it's less a measure of what people need than a convenient reference point, especially for those who are prone to dehydration, such as many elderly people.
The consensus seems to be that the average person loses ten cups (where one cup = eight ounces) of fluid per day but also takes in four cups of water from food, leaving a need to drink only six glasses to make up the difference, a bit short of the recommended eight to ten glasses per day. But according to the above-cited article, medical experts don't agree that even that much water is necessary:
Kidney specialists do agree on one thing, however: that the 8-by-8 rule is a gross overestimate of any required minimum. To replace daily losses of water, an average-sized adult with healthy kidneys sitting in a temperate climate needs no more than one liter of fluid, according to Jurgen Schnermann, a kidney physiologist at the National Institutes of Health.

One liter is the equivalent of about four 8-ounce glasses. According to most estimates, that's roughly the amount of water most Americans get in solid food. In short, though doctors don't recommend it, many of us could cover our bare-minimum daily water needs without drinking anything during the day.

[snip]

[Ariphaos]

link
I'm sorry, but this has to be the most amazing bit of stupidity i have read in quite some time. Comments anyone?

The Telegraph being stupid? Yes.

If you are dehydrated, there is a not-insignificant chance that water consumption will not help you, and thinking that water consumption alone will help you is not just bad advice, but also dangerous.

Dehydration is not a disease, it's a symptom. It may be due to lack of water consumption. It may also be due to extreme physical activity. In which case, you've also lost things that help regulate water consumption - namely salt, and drinking nothing but water in response can be fatal in extreme condition. This is why, for example, when you get an IV drip, it's not pure water, but rather a saline mixture.

It may also be due to a disease of some other sort, in which case the proper answer is medical treatment, not a misguided belief that water alone will cure what ails you.

[someone_else]

It may also be due to extreme physical activity. In which case, you've also lost things that help regulate water consumption - namely salt, and drinking nothing but water in response can be fatal in extreme condition.This is why, for example, when you get an IV drip, it's not pure water, but rather a saline mixture.

A clarification: That's due to issues with osmosis. A fluid that does not have the right concentration of salts and you destroys cells that are bathed in it (basically every cell in the body, but first go the blood cells).

But anyway, drinking normal water in cases of actual dehydratation is generally a good way to die, since the water intake will diluite the internal fluids, extracellular salt concentration will drop and cells will inflate with water and eventually blow up.
If medical staff isn't available, drinking common Gatorade-like product (basically water with the right concentration of salt and some flavor to hide the salty taste) should avoid death.

[Count Chocula]

Ahh, Gatorade, a product of the rednecks in Gainesville, Florida! It is pretty nasty tasting when you're not thirsty, but the elixir of the gods after spending three hours in August in Florida landscaping your yard.

A good point was made by prior posters. Water, in and of itself, will not keep your body healthy. US soldiers in tropical climates in WWII and Vietnam were issued salt tablets for that reason. Why do we ship shitton cans of warm soda to soldiers in Iraq and Afghanistan? Soda has salt. Water alone will stave off dehydration but will not replace salt and minerals lost to sweat and piss.

The EU decision seems like hair-splitting, or management of water companies' marketing messages. Considering the imminent meltdown of the currency, it seems like a silly thing to spend effort deciding.

[Stark]

I'm real sure the guys who monitor advertising are the same guys who manage financial policy. Right? Maybe all other government functions should cease for the duration?

[Count Chocula]

ITT we discover the EU has petty bureaucrats who can pass petty rules while the edifice begins to crumble around them. How American.