What you did is post a bibliography entry which neither confirms nor supports your hypothesis. It's merely a reference to a nearly 25 year old study which you obviously didn't want me to read since you didn't include a link.

My guess is because it has more to do with access to water than it does with hydration itself....but that IS just a guess.

It's $4,300 a year to view that journal, so you'll forgive me if I don't give you the link. Will the author's description of the conclusions suffice?

Thirst is, in fact, a very sensitive mechanism for regulating fluid intake, according to Barbara Rolls, PhD, a nutrition researcher at Pennsylvania State University. In a 1984 study in Physiology and Behavior, she and a group of colleagues at Oxford University followed a group of men as they went through their normal day. Left to their own devices, the volunteers became thirsty and drank long before their hydration levels showed any signs of dipping.

Says Rolls, "If people have access to water or other fluid beverages, they seem to do a very good job of maintaining hydration levels."

OK folks, if you drink too much water you could die of "water poisoning" whereas if you don't drink enough, you could die of "dehydration". So even with something as basic and vital as "water", there are limits and therefore there is a balance to be found somewhere in the middle. Just like on this board.. (ducking) hehehehe :D

Also, if you don't know the difference between "a magazine" and a scientific journal I doubt you could read and/or comprehend anything published in one, they're generally not written for a lay audience.

It's certainly more difficult to wrap your head around than Louisiana's castle doctrine statute, something we've all seen you completely misunderstand.

so, we're all agreed then.. we should all drink more water. Period. :peace:

I try to drink my share of water during the week. Get well hydrated, and ready for the weekend ;) wink wink nudge nudge :yes:

Exactly what I said, thirst by itself isn't an indication of dehydration. You haven't made some startling discovery, joe, you've merely "verified" a fact most of us already know in an feeble attempt at starting an argument......better luck next time.

ooops

So when you wrote "...and that's the deal, by the time you feel thirsty, you're already suffering from dehydration" you actually meant "...and that's the deal, by the time you feel thirsty, you're probably not suffering from dehydration?"

They say wars will be fought over it in the future...good a reason as any to drink plenty of it now.

Molon Labe! to you Sir Al. I agree with this post and good to see you on the board like a breath of fresh air. I see the gun bill did not pass :clap:
Isaac

No, What I said in my very next post, specifically to clarify the statement you were questioning was:

You are attempting to take a non specific statement, which was immediately clarified....but you don't care, that doesn't serve your purpose...and trying to argue the point "as if" you didn't read what I posted. Notice I'm giving you the benefit of the doubt here and assuming you DID read more than my reference to your bibliography entry in that post.

Like I said, you're just trying to start an argument and you've failed, but I'm not quite as easy of a prey to catch. Better luck next time.