You should never diet without drinking liquids, but you can fast for quite a while on water alone. People go for three days, five days, or even up to two weeks on water only detox diets. This has some advantages and some disadvantages. One of the advantages, strangely enough, is that it is the easiest detox diet plan to follow....

Along with the diet and drugs, the best defence against kidney stones is drinking lot of water. Water dilutes urine, but it doesn't help in all cases of kidney stones.

A fat ass or being fat is not only ugly, it is also unhealthy.The problem with most diets is that they are too drastic and don't burn fat.By eating less, you put your body in an alarm phase.OK, the first few weeks you will lose weight very fast. But this is mostly water. Your body will think...

"Ramen has long been the staple of the student diet. It's cheap and easy to make, and is available everywhere - leading to its almost exclusive appearance in the diets of students and others with little money. But ramen is just salt-loaded, flavoured starch and water - not very nutritious - and it gets boring very quickly."

Who would have thought you would see that? Some crazy Japanese company has been marketing this scam for 4 years. God help those who are buying it!

"Health risks"Where it says drinking no soda is healthiest, it makes me wonder why. Diet soda, aside from the caffeine, is pretty much the same as water once it's been drank. So far as I'm aware, caffeine-free diet soda is as healthy and safe as water. Ralphael 21:29, 12 December 2005 (UTC)Probably more health risks should be added, associated with each non-water ingredient:caffiene : addictive, possibly other health risks ( see Caffeine )aspartame, other artificial sweetener : unknown health effects ( see Sugar substitute )acid : bad for teeth --GodWasAnAlien 03:56, 5 May 2006 (UTC)I'm pulling the following statement:It's unclear what it's talking about, and I don't know how to fix it, since some pedestrian research isn't finding me that 1.5% figure. What era? Surely not between 1958 and 1963, when there was only one diet soda available. If someone can fix this wording, feel free to put it back. TreyHarris 08:17, 27 May 2004 (UTC)This seems prima facie unreasonable, considering what big business diet beverages are. No study has ever been made of the consumer demographics of a $30B industry? Do you have any citation to back up this claim? I was tempted to just remove it. TreyHarris 09:30, 27 May 2004 (UTC)I don't think you canDear Trey: Interesting questions. I got the tidbid about the 1.5 percent of the total soda market's share at a website, I dont remember which but it must have been cocacola.com or something maybe, because it is a well known fact that Tab was the first diet soda...now, I asked myself, if Tab was the first diet soda, then why did diet sodas already accoubnted for 1.5 percent of sodas?I do admittedly make research on other sites because I want to stick to the facts. That tidbit of info seemed somewhat confusing but I included it because that was part of what I found in my research but youre right, I mean mathematically speaking it doesnt make sense that Tab, the first sugar free soda, entered at a time where 1.5 of all sodas were diet. Then, mwe have to look to see what they defined as diet sodas then, maybe they were low carb, low something but I dont know..As far as the other statement, I , at least havent heard of any study done on consumers. I guess I assumed that companies and study makers figure these products are only drunk by diabetics and fitness conscious people I dont know.Thanks for noticing and God bless you!Sincerely yours, Antonio suga u up Martin!!