this post was submitted on 27 Nov 2023
260 points (98.9% liked)

World News

39046 readers
3702 users here now

A community for discussing events around the World

Rules:

Similarly, if you see posts along these lines, do not engage. Report them, block them, and live a happier life than they do. We see too many slapfights that boil down to "Mom! He's bugging me!" and "I'm not touching you!" Going forward, slapfights will result in removed comments and temp bans to cool off.

We ask that the users report any comment or post that violate the rules, to use critical thinking when reading, posting or commenting. Users that post off-topic spam, advocate violence, have multiple comments or posts removed, weaponize reports or violate the code of conduct will be banned.

All posts and comments will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis. This means that some content that violates the rules may be allowed, while other content that does not violate the rules may be removed. The moderators retain the right to remove any content and ban users.


Lemmy World Partners

News !news@lemmy.world

Politics !politics@lemmy.world

World Politics !globalpolitics@lemmy.world


Recommendations

For Firefox users, there is media bias / propaganda / fact check plugin.

https://addons.mozilla.org/en-US/firefox/addon/media-bias-fact-check/

founded 1 year ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] rambaroo@lemmy.world 1 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (4 children)

Cool so when do we start banning junk food? This isn't a slippery slope argument. I'm using the same logic you're using against tobacco, except sugar kills more people than tobacco does.

[–] AA5B@lemmy.world -2 points 11 months ago (3 children)

My intake of sugar has no affect on anyone else.

Food is a necessity: smoking is not

Obesity is also more complicated than just sugar. I can only go by personal anecdote here but I struggle with weight issues despite not eating much junk or overly processed food. A sugar tax would affect actual foods but not be sufficient nor even useful toward improving health

[–] rambaroo@lemmy.world 3 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (2 children)

Your intake of sugar absolutely impacts other people when you end up with chronic health issues that other people have to help pay for.

Sugar doesn't just cause obesity, it also causes all kinds of cancer. https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC9775518/

And sugar is not a necessity. https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/nutritionsource/carbohydrates/added-sugar-in-the-diet/

You will get by just fine without sugar in your diet. I didn't say we should ban food, I said we should ban sugar. You're struggling to show me why it's so different from tobacco.

The only real differences are 1) everyone loves sugar, so they'll make up a reason for the double standard and 2) public consumption doesn't immediately hurt other people. But then I never said I was opposed to banning smoking in public so that's actually irrelevant.

[–] nybble41@programming.dev 0 points 11 months ago* (last edited 11 months ago)

Your ~~intake of sugar~~ participation in extreme sports absolutely impacts other people when you end up with chronic health issues that other people have to help pay for.

It's not as if there's some natural law obligating you to pay for anyone else's health issues. Your government is responsible for externalizing that private cost onto you and others, effectively subsidizing risk-taking and irresponsibility. If you don't like it, insist that people pay for their own health care and insurance at market rates, without subsidies.

load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)
load more comments (1 replies)