| RolStoppable said: For comparison's sake, how many people died in 2020 from the consequences of too high sugar and fat intake over the course of their lives? |
Back in the earlier 2000's, they did a study that estimated roughly 25,000 pr year, died in the USA due to sugary drinks.
Yes people eat/drink themselves into early deaths.
The thing is, you have choice in the matter of food.
You can choose to not eat takeout, not eat cake, candy, drink soft drinks (go with water instead) ect. Responsibility rests on your own shoulders.
You cannot choose to "avoid corona" if your forced to work, or go out to buy groceries ect. Responsibility rests on others shoulders (to not infect others).
Also Republicans, wouldnt want to limit the food instrustry or regulate it too much would it?
Thats what those pesky european communists do!
Anyways two wrongs dont make a right.
Coronavirus has "offically" killed 360k in less than a year in the USA.
(real number is likely much higher)
So why not fight both?
Shutdowns/facemasks/vaccines + heavy regulation of the food instrustry, and limit its allowed sugar addatives, artifical tastes/sweeteners ect.
And save even more lives?
No one is saying, that you should allow one bad thing, because another bad thing is happending.
The smart move, is to do something against both.
if you adopted all the rules & regulations the EU has with foods, you could also more easily sell to european markets.
As a starting point, if you wanted to go beyound that, you could as well ofc.
The problem is, finding a politican that actually wants to tackle such issues.
*edit:
basically your argument that you should allow a virus free roam to kill many more than it currently does, because... other things also kill people... is a odd way to argue against doing something vs the corona virus (or belittle its impact).
Essay Pro