main
  about us
  news
  topics
  author
  euroletter
  news from other sites
  links
 
 
 Libertarian Theory
  General
  Anarchism
  Capitalism
  Democracy
  Minarchism
  Nationalism
  Rights
  Socialism/Communism
 Economy
  General
  Austrian School
  Business Cycles
  Gold Standard
  Inflation
 Education
  General
  Private education
 Environment
  General
  Climate
  Energy
  Greenhouse effects
  "Greens"
 Government
  General
 Health
  General
  Abortion, Euthanasia, Suicide
  Alcohol, Tobacco and Drugs
  Cloning
  Cryogen suspension
  Food and Medicine /Right to choose your own
  Regulation
  Health Care
 Individuals
  General
 International Relations
  General
  Development Help
  Europe and EU /Uniting Europe without the Union
  Globalising
  Migration
  Secession Right
  War on Terrorism
 Interviews
  General
 Miscellaneous
  General
 Politics
  General
 Previews
  General
 Rights
  General
  Gun Rights
  Human Rights /Emancipation
  Property Rights
  Self Defence
  Speech Freedom
  Values and Norms
 Rights, Justice
  General
  Punishment and restitution
  Punishment
  Security
  War on Drugs
 Taxes
  General
  Taxes
  Social security
  Subsidies
 Communication
  General
  Censoring
  Internet Freedom
  Privacy and Encryption
 Religion
  General
  Islam
  Internet
  Investment
  War
  Politicians
  Redistribution
  Waste
  Police
 Repression and Police State
  General
  Database State
  Torture
 Activism
  General
  Conservatism
  Unclassified
 
Today: Mon, May 2 2016  -  Last modified: April, 26 2007
 Health
31 March 2016
 
 
The force is not with you
by Professor Theresa Marteau
 sub-topic» Alcohol, Tobacco and Drugs

Ironically, this means that there is now a vital new role for effective communication about disease risk and its reduction, this time focused on increasing our support for interventions – often by government – to forcibly change environments to make easier the healthier behaviours that many of us prefer but still find difficult to achieve. How to increase public demand for such interventions is a research question to which my group and others in Cambridge are now turning.

Having eschewed research on the communication of risk as a poor means for changing behaviour, I now see it as core. Without public demand, other interests will shape our environments. With public demand we have a sporting chance of implementing what we now know is key to healthier populations: environments – physical, digital, economic and social – that readily enable healthier behaviours.

 more» 
03 September 2014
 
 
Don't be a Slave of Fascist Bureaucrats
by Scott Lazaroiwitz
 sub-topic» Alcohol, Tobacco and Drugs

But it isn’t just the enforcers of the laws against harmless behaviors who are criminals for arresting or caging innocent people. The actual government bureaucrats who make up the artificial rules are causing the endangerment of innocent people in the first place. The Congressmen, state legislators, city councilors, etc. — those thugs also need to be arrested and charged with endangerment and threatening the lives of totally innocent people as well, each and every time they pass any law or legally enforceable ordinance that puts an innocent individual’s life at risk. And that includes the Presidents, governors, and mayors who sign such criminally injurious warrants against the hapless public.

 more» 
01 September 2014
 
 
Of Morality and Failed Business Strategies...
by Wilton Alston
 sub-topic» Alcohol, Tobacco and Drugs

Drug prohibition is unarguably malum prohibitum and therefore simply the attempt–misguided and puritanical–to impose the choices of some on the behavior of all. Ergo, it was destined for failure. By the way, this in no way suggests that drugs are good, but then again, neither are Twinkies. Now, if one wants to argue about the possible negative results of drug usage–crime, sickness, whatever–those ostensibly resultant actions, at least those that actually infringe on others, are ALREADY against the law. They are, in fact, malum in se regardless.

 more» 
19 May 2014
 
 
Official: There Really Is No Booze Britain 'Epidemic'
by Dick Puddlecote
 sub-topic» Alcohol, Tobacco and Drugs

So the WHO has quite brilliantly skewered the ethnic argument from the likes of Sheron and Robinson because they simply can't have it both ways. If they want to look at just the rates of those who drink - that is, strip out the people who are teetotal - there are 94 nations with a greater 'booze epidemic' than us.

However, if they insist on sticking to the per capita ranking to advance their agenda, we are 25th but - by their own admission - the proportion of ethnic minority children in schools who will grow up to reject alcohol is "growing rapidly" so our rank will swiftly improve.

 more» 
22 November 2013
 
 
Should the Poor be Prevented from Buying "Super-Strong" Alcohol?
by Sean Gabb
 sub-topic» Alcohol, Tobacco and Drugs

  • In a free country – which this is not – no one should come to the attention of the authorities unless he is suspected of a clearly-defined crime.
  • This scheme is a collective punishment of the poor, who have just as much right to drink as anyone else in England.
  • It is also based on threats of police harassment of any shopkeeper who declines to join in.
  • In general, it is the work of a middle class, puritanical attack on the rights of poor people. Everyone behind it should be sacked, and their department shut down.

 more»