Brexit Penny Dropping?

[The Voice of Reason]

10 hours ago, manxman1980 said:

@The Voice of Reason

I suspect that there is more to the story than you have shared.

The answer, I suspect, relates to the word "substantial".  You can in fact kill yourself by drinking too much water through "water intoxication".  Cases are rare but do happen and it could be that "EU bureaucrats" took the stance that people may drink "substantial" amounts of water leading to more cases of water intoxication and possibly leaving routes for legal action.

I think most people know that dehydration can be prevented/treated by drinking water but it has to be the right amount at the right time.

That’s straw clutching at its finest.

[The Voice of Reason]

10 hours ago, manxman1980 said:

@The Voice of Reason

Another thought...

Would you allow Coca Cola to use a slogan suggesting that regular Coke can be used to treat hypoglycemia?

It I true, a hypo can be treated by giving a sugary drink like Coke (followed by something more substantial containing carbohydrates such as a sandwich).  

Drinking Coke does, however, carry other health risks and can actually lead to diabetes too.

Whilst one statement may be true, it may not be appropriate to allow its use in a promotional way.

The story was about water not Coke.

But to answer your question vin your second paragraph. No

[manxman1980]

28 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said:

That’s straw clutching at its finest.

As @HeliX said so is completely misrepresenting a news article 

24 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said:

The story was about water not Coke.

But to answer your question vin your second paragraph. No

The point was applying thinking to claims made by drinks companies. 

[The Voice of Reason]

6 hours ago, HeliX said:

How come you missed out the end of the article?

 

The actual tested claim was:

"The regular consumption of significant amounts of water can reduce the risk of development of dehydration and of concomitant decrease of performance."

The British Soft Drinks Association opined:

"The European Food Safety Authority has been asked to rule on several ways of wording the statement that drinking water is good for hydration and therefore good for health. It rejected some wordings on technicalities, but it has supported claims that drinking water is good for normal physical and cognitive functions and normal thermoregulation."

 

The voice of shite more like.

Omitted for brevity.
Those two paragraphs don’t negate what is written in the previous ones.

[The Voice of Reason]

Brussels bureaucrats were ridiculed for a previous ruling against a claim that water can prevent dehydration.:

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.
 

 

Now tell me again that EU laws are always sensible

Edited December 30, 2023 by The Voice of Reason

[manxman1980]

53 minutes ago, The Voice of Reason said:

Brussels bureaucrats were ridiculed for a previous ruling against a claim that water can prevent dehydration.:

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.
 

 

Now tell me again that EU laws are always sensible

Producers of bottled water!  Tap water or any other form of fresh clean water works just as well as expensive bottled water.

You are basically stating that producers should be allowed to advertise bottled water as being a cure for dehydration so that they can make an excessive profit.

The EU appear to be saying that there is nothing special about bottled water that makes it a cure for dehydration. 

In the part quoted above it says it will come into force in the UK.  Why is that?  Why haven't the UK Government used its sovereignty to stop this being introduced seeing its no longer a member of the EU?

Just admit that you have shared what you thought was a great example, been found to have omitted a key part of the article,  and are now trying desperately to justify it.

I do agree that the length of time taken to make the decision is ridiculous. 

[The Voice of Reason]

1 hour ago, manxman1980 said:

Producers of bottled water!  Tap water or any other form of fresh clean water works just as well as expensive bottled water.

You are basically stating that producers should be allowed to advertise bottled water as being a cure for dehydration so that they can make an excessive profit.

The EU appear to be saying that there is nothing special about bottled water that makes it a cure for dehydration. 

 

Well of course tap water has the same effect on dehydration as bottled water. It’s just a bit tricky to  try and attach a label to water flowing from a tap!

How does putting a label on a bottle of water saying drinking it could help with dehydration lead to excessive profits?

It’s not like it’s a false claim and is useful information that could improve your health.

I don’t recall any label on a bottle of water that claims it is better for you than tap water. Of course any such claim should not be allowed.

So back to basics. EU law says you can’t put a sticker on a produced bottle of water saying drinking water may help in the case of dehydration.

It’s what NHS guidelines state, no more

Do you really not think that is crazy? Seriously?

Edited December 30, 2023 by The Voice of Reason
Addition of penultimate paragraph

[La Colombe]

3 hours ago, The Voice of Reason said:

Do you really not think that is crazy? Seriously?

I'd take the freedom of movement over your desperate bollocks any day. 

[John Wright]

4 hours ago, The Voice of Reason said:

Do you really not think that is crazy? Seriously?

Yes, it’s crazy… that you continue to be taken in by the anti EU drivel that’s written in the Torygraph, Wail, etc. it’s crazy that they still engage in it.

This is a nothing story about a realignment of interpretation of regulations over what advertising and health claims that can be made by manufacturers of water and mainly water products.

The Torygraph version has no connection to reality, a bit like the straight banana, cucumber and cubed eggs and tomato stories.

it actually dates back to 2012, in the bureaucratic speak of civil service documentation this is the legal reasoning.

…according to the canons of interpretation of EU law, …this restriction of use, set out in Regulation (EU) No 432/2012, must be interpreted in conformity with primary EU law; …meaning that the permitted water health claims may be made for all water based foodstuffs, including non-alcoholic beverages (such as fruit and vegetable juices, infusions prepared with water and herbs or parts of plants such as flowers or fruits, tea, coffee and also soft drinks, which typically have a water content between 90% to 99%).

The question as to whether … water health claims are banned in specific cases, for reasons of consumer protection and health policies, cannot be solved by imposing specific restrictions of use in Regulation (EU) No 432/2012, but by applying, on … a "case by case basis" approach, the general principles and conditions laid down in Regulation (EC) No 1924/2006, applicable to all health claims;

such as nutrient profiles, and, also,

the requirement that the use of health claims shall not be

false,

ambiguous

misleading,

nor shall it encourage or condone excess of consumption of a specific food.

In other words no false claims, only claims for which you have proof.

Its pretty basic and non exceptional.

And, as ever, context is everything. Bottled water used to be just that, water, still or sparkling. Then there has been an upsurge in all sorts of water based soft drinks, sold at a real premium, as isotónics, or with other health or energy claims. And yes, they sell at such a premium that the manufacturers make an absolute fortune.

Just have a look at the launch material, and claims, for Coke brand “smart water”.

And again, if you’re dehydrated then it’s likely that your electrolytes will be out of kilter and need supplementation, plain water won’t do that, and if someone is severely dehydrated just guzzling water could be dangerous. You need medical supervision, in hospital.

Oral rehydration solutions

When you’re dehydrated, you lose sugar and salts, as well as water. Drinking a rehydration solution will enable you to re-establish the right balance of body fluids. The solution should contain a mixture of potassium and sodium salts, as well as glucose or starch.

There are several different rehydration products available over the counter from pharmacies or on prescription from your GP, including solutions that are suitable for infants and children.

Ask your GP or pharmacist for advice about the most suitable rehydration solution for you or your child.

Severe dehydration

Seek immediate medical help if you suspect someone is severely dehydrated (see symptoms of severe dehydration).

They may need to be admitted to hospital for treatment. In particular, babies, infants and elderly people will need urgent treatment if they become dehydrated.

Fluid may be given up the nose using a nasogastric tube or using a saline drip into a vein (intravenously). This will provide essential nutrients faster than using solutions that you drink.

If you have had bowel surgery, some rehydration solutions may not contain enough salt. In this instance, you will need a higher-strength solution. Your GP or surgeon can recommend a suitable rehydration solution for you.

[woolley]

Jesus wept. Such minutiae.

[John Wright]

16 minutes ago, woolley said:

Jesus wept. Such minutiae.

Sometimes to combat the untruths you have to drill down. The lies shouldn’t be left unchallenged.

[woolley]

1 minute ago, John Wright said:

Sometimes to combat the untruths you have to drill down. The lies shouldn’t be left unchallenged.

Drill down? More like dumb down.

[La Colombe]

Brexit is a complete failure. That's now the belief of a clear majority of Britons. 

[The Voice of Reason]

10 minutes ago, La Colombe said:

Brexit is a complete failure. That's now the belief of a clear majority of Britons. 

Yada, yada, yada

Blah, blah, blah

Edited December 30, 2023 by The Voice of Reason

[woolley]

11 minutes ago, La Colombe said:

Brexit is a complete failure. That's now the belief of a clear majority of Britons. 

But they only consider the implications on a very mundane level. Very lucky to have broken free of it.