No surprise, after millions in funding, and years of research and study, any such exaggerative claims have now been banned under EU law.

EU bans claim that water can prevent dehydration

No doubt serious restrictions on food labeling are next, preventing all food producers from greedily misrepresenting food as capable of "relieving hunger".

I hope that you are not taking the P out of this highly respected organisation.
(that's a form of dehydration I guess)

FFS! What a load of tosh, and to think people get paid from tax money for spouting this crap!

Like most of these stories, it appears to be bollox, based on a faux product "water" proposal.
The EU document is here. And more or less says that you cant claim that drinking water today will stop dehydration tomorrow ( disease risk reduction claim).

That's why we use beer,the water content has been reduced by alcohol.

The way I see it is that the EU are saying that if you are de-hydrated then buying a bottle of water will not solve your problem. Being de-hydrated is a whole lot more complicated than that. It's a bit like these people who go to the gym for an hour but only do 10 mins workout then have a protein drink thinking that's sorted them.

That may or may not be true, but that's not what's amusing about it. It's the fact that the EU feels the necessity to define all "truths" in life.

Those selling water may greedily claim that water (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hydration) can quench thirst or moderate / minimise dehydration (or lack of water). Surely, anyone can find all sorts of rationale why that's not true under certain conditions.

On the upside, no doubt this decision will prevent those greedy immoral businesses from potentially selling water by offering hydration as a solution to de-hydration.

And even more laughable, it makes Coca Cola better because it "quenches thirst", which water is unable to claim.

Right, then.

Is that correct? Is that what the document says?

While we are on the EU and Science...

The role of Chief Scientist has been dropped because the green lobby disapproved of the support of GMOs by the scientific community as represented by the incumbent.

Politics stinks.

With their logic as she claims coca cola qunches thirst... but does not claim to rehydrate. Clear?

Um - no...

exactly

It's not what it says, it's what it implies. If consuming water (hydration) cannot be considered a means of preventing dehydration, then obviously, it also cannot quench thirst (which is, implicitly, dehydration).

The irony is that in some unknown public interest, the EU aspires to prevent private sector businesses from making such implicit claims, but that prevention in itself is an implicit claim that can equally be construed to be patently false by another metric.

The point is, what's the point? Water is still water, and people will still drink it to quench their thirst (and perhaps better they consume water than many of the alternatives). So, what is the benefit to the public, exactly?

Again..exactly.

There has to be control over what companies claim in their advertising because the reason for adds is to increase sale and profits. .If controls did not exist then we would. soon see a return to the days when the tobacco companies suggested that smoking was good for your health and improved your popularity.
As for the water debate re hydration is as much about replacing essential minerals as quenching your thirst. Water does not do that in fact if you are badly de hydrated drinking too much water can be bad for as it washes minerals etc out of your system.