- London ban on transit ads depicting “bad” foods winds up nixing images of Wimbledon strawberries and cream, bacon, butter, cheese, jam, honey, and Christmas pudding [Scott Shackford]
- And more: British medical journal The Lancet wants to do some highly non-consensual poking and jabbing at your midsection, with the aim of making you lose weight; highlights include funding activist campaigns, cutting business out of policy discussions, and routing policy through the least accountable international organizations [Christopher Snowdon, The Spectator; more from Snowdon on state-subsidized anti-food advocacy in Britain; Nina Teicholz]
- Pushing back on the Lancet panel’s guideline that each person be allowed no more than one egg and less than 3.5 ounces of red meat a week [Mark Hemingway]
- “The Problem With Nudging People to Happiness” [Randy Barnett reviews Cass Sunstein’s On Freedom]
- “Pharmaceutical Freedom: Why Patients Have a Right to Self Medicate”, Cato Daily Podcast with Jessica Flanigan and Caleb Brown;
- “Proposed Anti-Soda Bills in California Would Ban Big Gulps, Mandate Warning Labels on Vending Machines” [Christian Britschgi] “Medical Groups Endorse New Taxes and Marketing Restrictions on Soda — For the children, of course” [Baylen Linnekin]
Filed under: nanny state, obesity, pharmaceuticals, public health, soft drinks, United Kingdom
5 Comments
It appears that in the absence of religion, nannies want how long you live to be the only standard of virtue. But in a materialistic world, why not enjoy your food and die at 87 instead of 89? The joke goes “do vegetarians live longer?” “No, it just seems that way”. If you consider that vegetarians are usually white, educated, and health-conscious (and thus likely to live longer anyway) it is in fact very difficult to prove that they live longer. Studies usually just compare vegetarians to all others, which is invalid.
The impulse to “fix” everyone else is really sick. Most people are barely making it day to day and find some pleasure in their life in food. The old-time religious zealots at least let you eat without being bothered. Oh, and it doesn’t stop there–the new zealots want to not let you have straws or styrofoam take out (paper does not work for straws or even take out most of the time), or plastic bags or big cars on and on.
The line from “Independence Day” is apt
“What do they want?” “They want you to die”
The old-time religious zealots at least let you eat without being bothered.
Oh, I don’t know. I seem to remember some of the old-time religious zealots having rules about things like bacon cheeseburgers, shrimp, meat during Lent, fasting on certain holidays… Of course they mostly kept it to their in-groups, rather than demanding the rules be applied to everyone (blue laws for alcohol notwithstanding).
As movements like this continue we are desperate need for the “leading by example” constitutional amendment or law:
Congress shall make no law which does not also affect Congress, its members, and staff. Violation of such law by Congress is automatically a felony.
Or something of the sort.
And given today’s administrative state, something similar applying to Federal rulemaking agencies (with said rules also applying to Congress of course).
No, at this point what we need, is
Amendment the 28th: Congress shall make no law(full stop).*
This is to correct a scrivener’s error in the 1st amendment. 🙂
“If you’re afraid of butter, use cream.” ? Julia Child.