Wall Street Journal (WSJ) columnist Sumathi Reddy and her recent wellness article titled ‘Ditch the 40-Ounce Water Bottle: You’re Probably Hydrated Enough’, has sparked a heated online discourse after it argued that people are exaggerating about how much water they must drink.
Readers were quick to equate such messaging to being pro-AI, amid the context of growing anxieties over data centres’ large water consumption and the resulting implications on water security. Reddy, albeit shallowly, does acknowledge the pressing issues of increasingly strong heatwaves and droughts, yet problematically turns to place such blame on health-conscious consumers, vilifying anyone who dares to drink more than the daily recommendation.
If Reddy focused on the growing commodification of water and critiqued the trends of a vital human need being engulfed by consumerism, like Erewhon’s (the luxury Californian grocery store chain) $12 “Sacred Water.” I doubt the article would have received such aggravated backlash. I personally find how water is increasingly being equated with aesthetics, trends, and glamour incredibly troubling. Subsects of wellness culture have gone too far, subscribing into vanity and status, while normalising absurd prices for basic public goods. No one should feel ashamed of carrying their 40-ounce water bottle; it might be necessary due to a health condition or simply the need to stay hydrated when exercising. However, recognition of how these functional containers have been transformed into accessories, through the creation of limited editions and colours which encourage a culture of collection, does question the legitimacy of a seemingly sustainable and reusable product.
The WSJ has a dubious history surrounding AI. Billionaire investor Stanley Druckenmiller has openly admitted to using generative AI in his editorial, and the WSJ Pro AI— the journal’s specialised news service— focuses on developments in the AI industry. While it is a jump to conclude Reddy’s article as pro-data centres, such deductions by readers are telling of a society’s growing anxiety surrounding AI and its environmental implications.
Ultimately, Reddy ignores the significance of why water is becoming such a heavily debated topic, failing to mention any of the extreme droughts which plagued the summer of 2026, or the increasingly discussed rapid levels of localised water pollution caused by data centres. According to the 2026 World Economic Forum Global Risks Report, extreme weather events rank as the leading risk to long-term prosperity, and this year the United Nations declared we are living in an era of “global water bankruptcy”. Water insecurity is largely driven by the anthropogenic causes of climate change, which have significantly altered the hydrological landscape and global water cycle. As a result, Reddy’s distaste for a clunky water bottle seems trivial by comparison, and avoidant in addressing the most critical issues surrounding society’s extractivist approach to water.
The bottom line is: don’t feel pressured by Reddy to ditch your water bottle, or coerced into believing your Stanley cup or reusable Yeti is the cause of water insecurity. Remember to stay hydrated while recognising the problematic nature of trends that promote hyperconsumption and commodify a public good, while failing to tackle the underlying reasons for a global water crisis.
“Water bottles” by Thad Zajdowicz is marked with CC0 1.0.
Related
Your Stanley Cup is Not to Blame for Water Insecurity.
Wall Street Journal (WSJ) columnist Sumathi Reddy and her recent wellness article titled ‘Ditch the 40-Ounce Water Bottle: You’re Probably Hydrated Enough’, has sparked a heated online discourse after it argued that people are exaggerating about how much water they must drink.
Readers were quick to equate such messaging to being pro-AI, amid the context of growing anxieties over data centres’ large water consumption and the resulting implications on water security. Reddy, albeit shallowly, does acknowledge the pressing issues of increasingly strong heatwaves and droughts, yet problematically turns to place such blame on health-conscious consumers, vilifying anyone who dares to drink more than the daily recommendation.
If Reddy focused on the growing commodification of water and critiqued the trends of a vital human need being engulfed by consumerism, like Erewhon’s (the luxury Californian grocery store chain) $12 “Sacred Water.” I doubt the article would have received such aggravated backlash. I personally find how water is increasingly being equated with aesthetics, trends, and glamour incredibly troubling. Subsects of wellness culture have gone too far, subscribing into vanity and status, while normalising absurd prices for basic public goods. No one should feel ashamed of carrying their 40-ounce water bottle; it might be necessary due to a health condition or simply the need to stay hydrated when exercising. However, recognition of how these functional containers have been transformed into accessories, through the creation of limited editions and colours which encourage a culture of collection, does question the legitimacy of a seemingly sustainable and reusable product.
The WSJ has a dubious history surrounding AI. Billionaire investor Stanley Druckenmiller has openly admitted to using generative AI in his editorial, and the WSJ Pro AI— the journal’s specialised news service— focuses on developments in the AI industry. While it is a jump to conclude Reddy’s article as pro-data centres, such deductions by readers are telling of a society’s growing anxiety surrounding AI and its environmental implications.
Ultimately, Reddy ignores the significance of why water is becoming such a heavily debated topic, failing to mention any of the extreme droughts which plagued the summer of 2026, or the increasingly discussed rapid levels of localised water pollution caused by data centres. According to the 2026 World Economic Forum Global Risks Report, extreme weather events rank as the leading risk to long-term prosperity, and this year the United Nations declared we are living in an era of “global water bankruptcy”. Water insecurity is largely driven by the anthropogenic causes of climate change, which have significantly altered the hydrological landscape and global water cycle. As a result, Reddy’s distaste for a clunky water bottle seems trivial by comparison, and avoidant in addressing the most critical issues surrounding society’s extractivist approach to water.
The University Needs to Come Clean on Its Finances
The bottom line is: don’t feel pressured by Reddy to ditch your water bottle, or coerced into believing your Stanley cup or reusable Yeti is the cause of water insecurity. Remember to stay hydrated while recognising the problematic nature of trends that promote hyperconsumption and commodify a public good, while failing to tackle the underlying reasons for a global water crisis.
“Water bottles” by Thad Zajdowicz is marked with CC0 1.0.
Share this:
Like this:
Related