also the article is silly because it is going to be used to justify government intervention and wasted tax money. in england, but nonetheless. ""aggressively targeting alcohol harms is a valid and necessary public health strategy." i would argue that that money would be better for public health if were used to hire hookers to have sex with american politicians and then blackmail them into opposing american farm subsidy.
the study is a steaming pile of pig manure. it cannot compute all the good alc0hol does from moderate consumption; like making people happy, enabling fornication, lowering stress, etc...a true impact assessment on society is nearly impossible. and to hell with society anyway. it's the individual that matters. i suggest we all refresh ourselves in Objectivism, the philosophy of Ayn Rand p.s. oh, by the way, i'm in Karratha, AU because the GOM is so dead... thanks a lot BP.
If only this was the truth. Then the Govt. would stop telling us how to live, what moral choices to take, and how much money they want that we earn..
I think you definitely could make that argument. thats a great point. don't smoke a joint, but here have a twinkie, who cares if parasites won't even eat it, chow down, it's great for you.
of course. article: "The World Health Organization estimates that risks linked to alcohol cause 2.5 million deaths a year" how many deaths do poor diets cause? brits are almost as fat as americans. perhaps we should pay the government to run some PSAs on the dangers of eating. or maybe i just live my damn life the way i want. no thanks, i dont want to pay for the privilege of being told that drinking is dangerous. i drink like a madman, and i know exactly what i am doing. i eat like a madman too, but i also run marathons. i dont need any health commissions telling me anything.
