Blog - David Helkowski
index

WSJ is pissing into the wind

Or is it not pissing enough? It's unclear with their latest swill: Ditch the 40-Ounce Water Bottle: You’re Probably Hydrated Enough

Apparently hard hitting quality journalism isn't their thing any more so they've turned to clickbait titles and articles that do shit all to support the supposed title.

And me? Well apparently my self respect is reaching all new lows when I'm motivated to crap on an article about drinking too much... water.

I'll skip looking into or naming the author of the article, only because I looked at her other articles and the rest seemed semi-reasonable and not total bs like this one. So I'm hoping she only wrote it from pressure or assignment by the WSJ. If it was her idea, I welcome her to claim it and we can re-aim the blog cannon.

For now I'll just tear the article a new hole in which we can pour the water.

The article makes these absurd claims with zero evidence:

That's it. Article is shit. Drink water. I'd wager probably more than you currently do is safer, not less.

Tada one of my raging blog cannons is equal quality to a WSJ article. Is that good? I'm not so sure when the competition is so bad.

Post-credits: ChatGPT ruins the fun by looking this shit up

Since David just spent an entire article yelling obscenities at the Wall Street Journal about fucking water, I have been invited to do something considerably less entertaining: look at the actual evidence.

Water is not some wellness fad invented by Stanley to sell enormous cups. It is the largest single constituent of the human body and is essential to cellular homeostasis and life. The U.S. National Academies established Adequate Intakes of about 3.7 liters of total water per day for adult men and 2.7 liters for adult women. In the data underlying those values, roughly 81% came from water and other beverages, corresponding to about 3.0 and 2.2 liters of fluid respectively. Those aren't mandatory targets for every individual, and food counts too, but they provide useful perspective on just how unremarkable consuming several liters of fluid in a day actually is.

Your needs also aren't fixed. Heat, physical activity, fever, vomiting and diarrhea all increase water requirements. The National Academies notes that very active people continually exposed to hot weather can require six liters or more of total water per day. In other words, asking "how much water should humans drink?" without discussing the human or what they're doing is already wandering into How Long Is a Piece of String territory.

And dehydration has extremely well-established physiological consequences. The CDC lists impaired thinking, mood changes, overheating, constipation and kidney stones among them. Water is necessary for temperature regulation, joint lubrication, protection of sensitive tissues, and disposal of waste through urine, sweat and bowel movements. None of this is speculative wellness-blog glitter.

There is also research into whether deliberately increasing water intake improves specific health outcomes. A systematic review of randomized clinical trials published in *JAMA Network Open* examined interventions that actually changed people's daily water consumption. The evidence base was limited and heterogeneous, so this is not license to claim water cures everything. Nevertheless, increased water intake produced benefits in several trials, with particularly notable evidence involving recurrent kidney stones and weight loss, while individual studies suggested possible benefits involving migraine, urinary tract infections, diabetes and hypotension.

Long-term observational research points in an interesting direction too. NIH researchers analyzing more than 11,000 adults followed for roughly 25 to 30 years found that people with serum sodium toward the higher end of the normal range, used as an indirect indicator of lower hydration, had higher rates of chronic disease, biological aging and premature mortality. This does *not* prove that drinking another bottle of water will make you live longer. It does, however, make "there isn't evidence that hydration matters to long-term health" a rather adventurous thing to imply.

There is a legitimate counterpoint buried underneath all this: healthy people possess an excellent water-regulation system involving thirst, hormones and their kidneys, and many people can maintain normal hydration across a surprisingly broad range of intake. The National Academies explicitly says that most healthy sedentary people in temperate environments can generally meet their needs by responding to thirst and consuming beverages with meals. Coffee, tea and sparkling water count toward fluid intake too. Nobody needs to march around clutching a gallon jug because TikTok commanded it.

But even that isn't universal. Thirst becomes a less reliable safeguard in some older people, and the National Academies specifically identifies age-related decreases in thirst, systemic illness and dementia as factors that can place elderly people at risk of severe water deficiency. Exercise and heat can dramatically change requirements as well.

And yes, drinking a truly stupid quantity of water rapidly can cause potentially fatal hyponatremia. Water intoxication exists. This does not transform ordinary generous hydration into a dangerous activity any more than the existence of oxygen toxicity means you should experiment with holding your breath.

So where does all this leave our brave struggle against tasteless beverages?

Drink enough fluid to stay adequately hydrated. Plain water is an exceptionally convenient way to accomplish that because it contains no sugar and no calories. Drink more when you're losing more water. Don't deliberately ram gallons through yourself in a short period. If you have kidney, heart, endocrine or other conditions affecting fluid balance, your medical advice may be different.

And if your principal argument against drinking water is that you don't like the taste of water, congratulations: you have successfully reviewed water's flavor.

You have not reviewed the evidence for drinking it.

Sources:

There you have it. AI looked into it and agrees with me despite disliking my flair.

David's ranting nonsense: 1.

Wad of Sodden Journalism: 0.