What has all this got to do with weather drinking water doesn't re-hydrate?
Water is essential to any "animal", even fish! They absorb it through their skin.
It has been proven that, IIRC, a loss of 2%, makes a difference of 10% in performance.
If we don't need water of some form, weather, from the food we eat, (contains water to some degree), or by drinking, how can peeps die from dehydration within 7days if the can't get water?
Does it really matter in what in what paper/s it was reported in?
The fact the ESFA report was a typical load of b*lls and a waste of our money by the EU, does need to be reported.
Some, if not not most of the things they want to put into law that ALL countries in the EU, have to abide by, are not to the good of all the countries with in the EU.
I'm not Left, Right or Center, I just think that the EU needs to be stopped and let countries make their own laws, etc.
Why should an over paid bunch of peeps be able to tell other countries what to do?
That should be left to what the countries to do. Plus it costs millions, if not billions for these buracates to sit in luxury, move to different countries every 6 months. Why, to what effect, reason?
One of my relations works for the EU and gets €45,000 every 6 months to move from Brussels to Stragsburg, even though has a house in both places. Fully furnished, etc.
Let for time is away, so not losing any money, if not gaining money!!
I could "rant and rant", but I've got some of my 'chest', so that's enough.......
I think the article is not written in perspective (indeed some Euro basing or protecting bottled water manufacturers). I think what the EU regulation tries to make an end of is the marketing of bottled water the only method of rehydrate yourself. Ofcourse water does rehydrates, any water/fluid does as long it doesn't contain bacteria which make you loose more fluid than you take in your body....
So yes bottled water does rehydrate you but the water out of your european drinking water tap does as well. The quality of european tap water is totally in order being said fit for human consumption. That's what this EU regulation is about if I gahther it correctly.
Bottled water is fine for countries where the tap water isn't treated as well as in europe. But so is coca cola (even kills bacteria which create diarea). So if abroad you have a water poisoning -> drink coke ) it helps!
It's incredible how different the gist of the EU argument is when you take time to actually read what they are trying to do rather than just go off on one base on some EU bashing article eh...
> If we don't need water of some form, weather, from the food we eat, (contains water to some degree), or by drinking, how can peeps die from dehydration within 7days if the can't get water?
I think the objection to the claims is that water alone can perform the miracle of rehydration, whereas the reality is that we can get hydration from the mutlitude of sources you suggest; food*, drinks other than water (tea, coffee, beer, etc).
Advertising that suggests that you must drink water to rehydrate is untrue and misleading, and therefore should not be allowed. It is good to remain hydrated, but it's misleading to claim that this can only be achieved by drinking water.
* before the days of bottled or safe piped water, one means of rehydrating was to buy a juicy apple (a costard, for instance) from a stallholder. This is the origin of the word costermonger; initially, a vendor of costards, but evolving in use to mean a stall-based vendor of fruit and veg.
Almost all of the stories bashing the EU are of questionable authenticity, from the "straight banana" lie through to most of the health and safety stories. Almost all of the EU "imposed" idiocy has in fact been initiated under British Law by British authorities.
The EU issues directives, usually formulated to enable social or regulatory legislation as a response to the concerns of various interested groups including commercial ones. The directives lay out the principles that locally enacted secondary legislation should address. How that legislation is framed and its enforcement is down to the respective representative and legislative bodies of member states.
By and large, EU directives are for the good of the members of the European Community as a whole, as individuals and as a trading group. EU directives have enforced the cleaning up of our beaches, our rivers, our water supply, our air quality. It has prevented loss of jobs and has protected the rights of individual workers in the public and private sectors when services were contracted out or taken over by other companies, it ensures rights that most employers, public and private, would rather we didn't have. In fact. as individuals, we have more guaranteed rights under EU law than ever we did before our country became a member of the ECM.
It's no wonder that there are so many Euro-sceptics in the Tory ranks. Look at the way Cameron is now attacking employment rights and intends to try to renegotiate a whole block of them with the rest of the EU partners.
* before the days of bottled or safe piped water, one means of rehydrating was to buy a juicy apple (a costard, for instance) from a stallholder. This is the origin of the word costermonger; initially, a vendor of costards, but evolving in use to mean a stall-based vendor of fruit and veg.
Every day's a school day. I'm going to try and drop that fact casually into a conversation later.
quite. well done the eu for stamping on the bottled water's parade with hefty boots. their you must drink 8 glasses of water a day has been proven, although i have no idea why that piece of complete nonsense ever needed it, to be the blx sensible people knew it was.
although the eu gets a bashing over various regulations there are a lot that come into force that you are grateful of (or may be grateful of) -e.g. soap and towels in pub toilets didn't get there by magic or the licensed trade thinking what a good idea; compulsory and standardised fire exit signs; the gall to introduce rules that would try to prevent that exhausted, sleep deprived doctor from messing with you.
whatever your stance on eurpoe it has introduced a lot of good stuff that would never have been done otherwise.
Britain does have a record of trying to water down the effects of EU directives in relation to employment law so as to advantage employers, dressing up such tactics as the famous (or infamous) special quality of British industry Blair trumpeted abroad as "flexibility". In most cases the British government eventually has had to comply.
> Britain does have a record of trying to water down the effects of EU directives
Under EC Directive 2011/EH2O, you're no longer allowed to use the term 'watered down', since dilution can be achieved by any number of means other than water...
> It's funny how those incensed by the EU are generally fond of the good old days of Empire though
Ah, but in those days it was us telling Johnny Foreigner what to do for his own good... Completely different scenario...
> Britain does have a record of trying to water down the effects of EU directives
Under EC Directive 2011/EH2O, you're no longer allowed to use the term 'watered down', since dilution can be achieved by any number of means other than water...
> It's funny how those incensed by the EU are generally fond of the good old days of Empire though
Ah, but in those days it was us telling Johnny Foreigner what to do for his own good... Completely different scenario...
