← Back to context Comment by slibhb 4 hours ago You could use this logic to ban unhealthy foods, or restrict people from eating too much. 6 comments slibhb Reply DicIfTEx 3 hours ago https://www.diabetes.org.uk/about-us/news-and-views/junk-foo...https://www.newfoodmagazine.com/government-bans-high-sugar-a...https://www.gov.uk/government/news/soft-drink-levy-extended-... Noumenon72 4 hours ago Or to resist ever passing a national health system. marcusverus 2 hours ago There is something insidious about the state forcing a citizen to pay for its services, only turn around and insist that the use of said services entitles the state to further control of the citizen. Gud 3 hours ago Considering the general state of the UK population, this may not be such a bad idea. nutjob2 2 hours ago This is just whataboutism, but the UK also regulates sugar in fairly draconian ways too, for example.There are good reasons to target smoking given how addictive and deadly it is. Nicotine is fairly unique in this regard. slibhb 1 hour ago It's reductio ad absurdum. Obesity is really bad for you and strains public health services. Should the government enforce a cap on caloric intake?
DicIfTEx 3 hours ago https://www.diabetes.org.uk/about-us/news-and-views/junk-foo...https://www.newfoodmagazine.com/government-bans-high-sugar-a...https://www.gov.uk/government/news/soft-drink-levy-extended-...
Noumenon72 4 hours ago Or to resist ever passing a national health system. marcusverus 2 hours ago There is something insidious about the state forcing a citizen to pay for its services, only turn around and insist that the use of said services entitles the state to further control of the citizen.
marcusverus 2 hours ago There is something insidious about the state forcing a citizen to pay for its services, only turn around and insist that the use of said services entitles the state to further control of the citizen.
nutjob2 2 hours ago This is just whataboutism, but the UK also regulates sugar in fairly draconian ways too, for example.There are good reasons to target smoking given how addictive and deadly it is. Nicotine is fairly unique in this regard. slibhb 1 hour ago It's reductio ad absurdum. Obesity is really bad for you and strains public health services. Should the government enforce a cap on caloric intake?
slibhb 1 hour ago It's reductio ad absurdum. Obesity is really bad for you and strains public health services. Should the government enforce a cap on caloric intake?
https://www.diabetes.org.uk/about-us/news-and-views/junk-foo...
https://www.newfoodmagazine.com/government-bans-high-sugar-a...
https://www.gov.uk/government/news/soft-drink-levy-extended-...
Or to resist ever passing a national health system.
There is something insidious about the state forcing a citizen to pay for its services, only turn around and insist that the use of said services entitles the state to further control of the citizen.
Considering the general state of the UK population, this may not be such a bad idea.
This is just whataboutism, but the UK also regulates sugar in fairly draconian ways too, for example.
There are good reasons to target smoking given how addictive and deadly it is. Nicotine is fairly unique in this regard.
It's reductio ad absurdum. Obesity is really bad for you and strains public health services. Should the government enforce a cap on caloric intake?