On January 15, 2007, a 28-year-old mother of three died from water intoxication (hyponatremia) hours after competing in a Sacramento radio station contest to see which contestant could drink the most water without urinating. The winner of the contest reportedly won a new video game system - the Nintendo Wii. The contest organizers obviously thought it very clever to have a contest called "Hold Your Wee for a Wii."

They may have been clever in thinking up contest names, but were not quite as clever in knowing the consequences of excess consumption of anything - including water.

Water intoxication - also known as hyponatremia - is more commonly seen among athletes, usually extreme athletes, although it can happen to anyone who consumes too much water, causing a critical loss of sodium. Dick Hanneman made a point of blogging this issue back in September, 2006 .

The young Sacramento mother was simply trying to secure the Wii game console for her children.

Contestants were asked to sign a waiver before taking part in the competition, but the winner of the game said participants were never alerted to the dangers.

A listener - apparently a nurse - called the show and warned the deejays of the risks of the game, but to no avail.

Yesterday, the radio station fired the morning disc jockeys and seven other employees involved in setting up the contest

Hyponatremia is a disorder of fluid and electrolyte balance characterized by an excess of body water relative to body sodium content (specifically a serum sodium concentration less than 135 mEq/L). It is the most common electrolyte disorder encountered in clinical medicine and is associated with negative outcomes in many chronic diseases. Yet, most people don't understand the significance of drinking water to excess without taking supplementary electrolytes, such as salt.

Although most hyponatremia victims may appear to be asymptomatic, severe hyponatremia is a medical emergency that calls for immediate treatment. Complications can include seizures, coma, brain-stem herniation, respiratory arrest, permanent brain damage, and death.

Two years ago, a 21-year-old student died of water intoxication during a hazing incident at Chico State University. He had been forced to drink from a five-gallon jug of water that was repeatedly refilled. He soon collapsed and had a seizure. Fraternity members didn't initially call an ambulance. By the time they did, it was too late. He was pronounced dead a few hours later.

It difficult to understand why we mindlessly continue to amuse ourselves with challenges that subject our bodies to physiological extremes, but if we do so, everyone should know the risks and consequences.

There's been a lot of chatter in the U.S. and the U.K. in recent weeks about food labels.

In the U.K., European Food Information Council (EUFIC) director general Josephine Wills presented her views to the CIAA on research on consumer response to nutrition information on food labels in Europe. She noted that although nutrition labeling has been a major instrument for consumer health and nutrition education, research shows consumers don't understand the information and likely misuse it in actual consumer purchasing decisions. The UK labeling debate divides consumer activists advocating a stoplight (red-yellow-green) "good food/bad food" label from the Food and Drink Federation (FDF) and many food manufacturers who advocate "Guideline Daily Amounts" (GDAs) for four key nutrients (calories, protein, carbohydrates and fats). Including salt is optional. FDF launched a 4m pound campaign last week to promote GDAs. The food industry effort has prompted two government agencies to proclaim a joint "independent" panel to provide an evidence-based resolution of the issues. For their side, perhaps the food companies can also agree on their own "independent" panel.

The same issues separate U.S. food manufacturers and "consumer" groups like the Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI). CSPI has agitated for many years for a "good food/bad food" stoplight label while the GMA/FPA and Food Marketing Institute announced last week its "Take a Peak" promotion campaign for the government's Food Guide Pyramid. The food manufacturers' campaign is the largest of a series of "private" label/education efforts which include commercial endorsement logos sold by the American Heart Association and grocers like Hanaford Brothers with their own "stars" labels. Predictably, CSPI objected to the new GMA/FPA-FMI promotion, having earlier sued FDA to require its preferred red-yellow-green stoplight. CSPI president Michael Jacbson complained to the Washington Post : "What's a consumer to do if one product has the Take a Peak logo and right next to it is a product that gets the American Heart Association logo for being a healthy food?"

Our suggestion: use evidence-based procedures to evaluate both the relationship of the claimed health benefits to quantities of nutrients ingested as well as objective measures of how consumers use food labels. There's a lot more heat than light on these issues at present.