Thursday, 5 December 2024
The march of the public health puritans
Two days ago Christopher Snowdon published a useful Critic piece on the latest manifestation of what seems like an endless stream of official hectoring over the food we eat.
Food for thoughtlessness
The march of the public health puritans continues
Misleading the public until the bitter end, the Department of Health and Social Care issued a press release this morning confirming that “junk food adverts” will be banned on TV before 9pm and online 24/7 from next October. It used the legally meaningless phrase “junk food” five times.
Junk food is in the eye of the beholder, but is obviously pejorative. That is why politicians and “public health” lobbyists use it. If they abandoned the weasel words and told us what is actually being prohibited, even natural allies of the nanny state might conclude that the advertising ban — which goes far beyond anything introduced elsewhere in the world — is a bit excessive.
The whole piece is well worth reading as these tedious assaults on our personal independence tend to drop out of the headlines as soon as some other insanity pops up.
We are only five months into a Labour government and already we have legislation going through parliament for tobacco prohibition, a ban on disposable vapes, a vape tax, an e-cigarette advertising ban, and a ban on advertisements for everyday food products. For those of us who believe in personal liberty and free markets, it is a depressing time to be alive. We can only hope that the pace of authoritarian government meddling slows down once Keir Starmer has implemented all the policies left over from the Rishi Sunak regime.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
7 comments:
This is just messing around at the edges of the problem. We need a ban on foods that result from colonial oppression, that are heterosexual in orientation, and that are produced using fossil fuels.
Are you not going a bit over the top when you describe an advertising ban as a 'tedious assault on our personal independence'?
I recommend a "junk fools" ban, starting with St Armer himself, the Lame Brain, Wierd Ed Miliband, and the Reiver.
I don't believe that what is commonly referred to as junk food, is either bad for you or junk. What is bad for so many, is the amount they eat and to the exclusion of other foods.
Sam - and a ban on food produced by ungrateful farmers who criticise the government.
Vatsmith - probably, but it's the kind of measure which looks like a rachet to establish a precedent so more will probably follow. To my mind it can be a mistake to be too acquiescent with what looks like an initial move. Not that it makes much difference.
dearieme - ha ha, good idea. At least Weird Ed Miliband helps cast a weird shadow over the rest of them.
Tammly - I agree, it's quantity and a lack of variety more than the food itself.
Did I hear mention of a ban on Bovaire. Listen.....
No.
Crickets.
Oh, yes, another Gaia saving nourishing food. For the plebs. But not at Davos.
Doonhamer - and anyone who thinks the likes of Arla wouldn't come up with a chemical improvement for cricket burgers should try them first.
Post a Comment