Jump to content

Recommended Posts

The chlorinated chicken fiasco on another thread prompted me to create this one. It will give us the chance to discuss and evaluate what legislation is worthwhile to keep or discard.


Horse passports.

Yes, under EU law all horses must have a "passport" which is an identification record which show whether that the particular horse can be used for food at the end of their life. This has arisen because under a EU law, it is illegal for people to eat pet horses but they are still allowed to eat other types of horses.


Europeans who raise and slaughter horses for meat must not pass them off as pets in a bid to dodge food safety rules.


https://ec.europa.eu/commission/presscorner/detail/en/IP_14_1000

Water does not hydrate you

In 2011 the EU banned drink manufactures from claiming that water can prevent dehydration.


EU officials concluded that, following a three-year investigation, there was no evidence to prove drinking water prevents dehydration.


Producers of bottled water are forbidden by law from making the claim and will face a two-year jail sentence if they defy the edict.


The move was criticised as being both at odds with science and common sense.


The NHS, which says dehydration occurs ?when your body loses more fluid than you take in?, advises drinking fluids to help ward off dehydration.


from the Express

Effra Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> from the Express


it doesn't matter what the rest of the post says - this bit overrides :) and I'd say bottled water does not hydrate you any better than tap water.


Express readers have also been moaning about the colour and quality of the new blue passports.

Blah Blah Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> As a vegetarian the very idea of eating a horse

> repulses me.



Not eaten meat for decades but why does this repulse you? Unless you are repulsed by eating all flesh. I'd add grey squirrel to the list that meat eaters should consume. Rat, dog but probably not cats.

Effra Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Water does not hydrate you

> In 2011 the EU banned drink manufactures from

> claiming that water can prevent dehydration.

>

> EU officials concluded that, following a

> three-year investigation, there was no evidence to

> prove drinking water prevents dehydration.

>

> Producers of bottled water are forbidden by law

> from making the claim and will face a two-year

> jail sentence if they defy the edict.

>

> The move was criticised as being both at odds with

> science and common sense.

>

> The NHS, which says dehydration occurs ?when your

> body loses more fluid than you take in?, advises

> drinking fluids to help ward off dehydration.

>

> from the Express


Have you actually read the EU decision? It is in relation to a specific food advertising claim put forward - not for a real product mind you - but by two people who have been very critical of the EU's oversight of food safety. They were upfront in saying the wording was designed to get the ruling that it did.


The claim made was: The regular consumption of significant amounts of water can reduce the risk of development of dehydration and of concomitant decrease of performance.


The ruling made absolutely clear that the EFSA supported claims that drinking water is good for normal physical and cognitive functions. If the wording had said that, they would have approved it. However, this particular wording was rejected because water on its own can't prevent dehydration and because it isn't the regularity of drinking water but drinking water at the times you need it which prevents dehydration.


From a personal perspective - I think the EU does some things really well and some things poorly, but just repeating "curated" anti-EU content without context drives me insane. There's lots you can criticise the EU for without relying on this sort of bullshit article (with apologies to admin).

Vacuum cleaners.


The EU dictated that vacuum cleaners should have a maximum power of 850 watts on the basis that it would save energy.


It is acknowledged in the industry that the optimum power is around 1200Watt as this gives worthwhile suction. With 850W it takes twice as long to do a decent job - so the energy saving argument is negated.

"It is acknowledged in the industry that the optimum power is around 1200Watt as this gives worthwhile suction. With 850W it takes twice as long to do a decent job - so the energy saving argument is negated."


This sounds like a load of hot air


Nobody sane genuinely takes twice as long to vacuum their house since and I've not noticed ANY difference at all - you are manufacturing outrage


(and again you try and lift this navel-gazing nation's attention and speak to friends and family in other eu countries - no outrage. No bother. so what IS it about the English and their outrage at the EU eh?)

Sadly we have lost sight that the UK punched above their weight in negotiating EU Law. It's easy to knock, such as urban myths like the banning of bent bananas,


Not everything was right, for example the banning of Incandescent light bulbs before LED ones on the shelf. Bit do you remember those dreadful things, bloody hot, the smell of burning plastic from the fitting, blowing every few weeks.

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • was the price not displayed on the menu?
    • It has come to this author’s attention that the world of 4+ admissions — that most enigmatic of educational rites — continues to bewilder even the most composed of parents. Fear not. For in a former life, I was not merely a humble observer, but a seasoned educator of over twenty years, and Head of Pre-Prep for a distinguished dozen. Now, with quill exchanged for touchscreen, I have taken to that most modern of salons — Instagram — to dispense guidance, answer frequently whispered questions, and illuminate the shadowy corners of school selection with clarity and calm. Each post bears my signature twist: a blend of insight, levity, and the occasional raised eyebrow. Should you find yourself adrift in the sea of admissions, I suggest you peruse my latest dispatch. It may well be the lifeline you seek. The Delicate Dilemma of the Summer-born 4+ Scholars Yours in solidarity and scholastic savvy, Lord Pencilton  🎩✏️
    • Perhaps Gooseygreeny was not familiar with the wildlife before Gala was imposed on the park, since when its value to wildlife has deteriorated. The Park had never been disturbed before, as the council had respected it as a Site of Importance for Nature Conservation, so only the Common was licensed by them as a site for events. The first time Gala held their event, there was a tree with woodpeckers nesting in it right in the middle of the main field they used and thrushes, blackbirds and great tits nesting within the shrubs and trees immediately surrounding the field. The woodpeckers were thriving on ants from the anthills in the grass. To those of us who used to enjoy watching the wildlife, it was very obviously a Site of Importance for a variety of birds. Despite being accessed by the public and their dogs, it had been relatively undisturbed,  which was one of the main reasons why it was so special and why I have been opposed to the Gala festival being held during the bird nesting season.
    • So dangerous!    Can you be more specific about the road this was in and when you report it?  Maybe there’s some CCTV footage available
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...