Nanny state on booze
Post Reply
 
Thread Rating:
  • 0 Votes - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
31-12-2016, 04:27 AM (This post was last modified: 31-12-2016 04:48 AM by adey67.)
RE: Nanny state on booze
(31-12-2016 12:09 AM)epronovost Wrote:  Alcohol consomation can be particularly harmful when taken in too large quantity. It's logical that if the State, whose in charge of the healthcare system, would make recomandation on alcohol consomation habits based on the best available science at the moment. If doctors thinks, with solid proofs to back it up, that consomation over a certain level becomes a severe risk for health, than it's the duty of the governement to distribute this information and encourage people to follow said guide-lines. It doesn't necessarly follow that prohibition would become necessary unless people turned out to be so irresponsible in their consomation habits that alcohol abuse would become a severe healthcare issue. Nobody likes prohibition and repressive regulation, but if you are too irresponsible or stupid to take care of yourself, someone else will have to do it for you (or let you suffer).

There are quite a few recovering and trying to recover alcoholics on this forum myself included, I'm not sure labeling them stupid and irresponsible wether they are in recovery or not is either productive or fair, they may find that somewhat insulting, I know I did. The nature of addiction is that a bad choice rapidly becomes a non choice, its also extremely painful when the person is in withdrawal I remember it well and even with medication to help it was agony, that pain frequently keeps addicts of all types trapped. I'm sure you didn't mean any harm you're a good and thoughtful contributor, just an unfortunate turn of phraseSmile
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 2 users Like adey67's post
31-12-2016, 05:01 AM
RE: Nanny state on booze
If you're only allowed 14 units a week ---

Go with a larger unit.

I'd go with gallons...................

Imperial, rather than US.....


Big Grin

.......................................

The difference between prayer and masturbation - is when a guy is through masturbating - he has something to show for his efforts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-12-2016, 05:05 AM
RE: Nanny state on booze
(31-12-2016 05:01 AM)onlinebiker Wrote:  If you're only allowed 14 units a week ---

Go with a larger unit.

I'd go with gallons...................

Imperial, rather than US.....


Big Grin

Lol you can drink as much as you like its a recommendation only Smile
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-12-2016, 05:10 AM
RE: Nanny state on booze
(31-12-2016 05:05 AM)adey67 Wrote:  
(31-12-2016 05:01 AM)onlinebiker Wrote:  If you're only allowed 14 units a week ---

Go with a larger unit.

I'd go with gallons...................

Imperial, rather than US.....


Big Grin

Lol you can drink as much as you like its a recommendation only Smile

Sure -- but if you go with my plan - you can stick to the government recommendations, feel good about yourself, and STILL turn your liver to stone....

Big Grin

.......................................

The difference between prayer and masturbation - is when a guy is through masturbating - he has something to show for his efforts.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-12-2016, 05:16 AM
RE: Nanny state on booze
(31-12-2016 05:01 AM)onlinebiker Wrote:  If you're only allowed 14 units a week ---

Go with a larger unit.

I'd go with gallons...................

Imperial, rather than US.....


Big Grin

[Image: 1guybv.jpg]

[Image: E3WvRwZ.gif]
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-12-2016, 07:20 AM
RE: Nanny state on booze
"Units" are defined in the link. If it's a recommendation, I can appreciate and understand that.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
[+] 1 user Likes Fireball's post
31-12-2016, 11:11 AM
RE: Nanny state on booze
(31-12-2016 04:27 AM)adey67 Wrote:  
(31-12-2016 12:09 AM)epronovost Wrote:  ... but if you are too irresponsible or stupid to take care of yourself, someone else will have to do it for you (or let you suffer).
I'm sure you didn't mean any harm you're a good and thoughtful contributor, just an unfortunate turn of phrase

Unfortunately this is an all too common attitude when it comes to mental health in general. It's even worse if they really don't mean it that way.

There is only one really serious philosophical question, and that is suicide. -Camus
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-12-2016, 11:26 AM
RE: Nanny state on booze
(31-12-2016 04:27 AM)adey67 Wrote:  There are quite a few recovering and trying to recover alcoholics on this forum myself included, I'm not sure labeling them stupid and irresponsible wether they are in recovery or not is either productive or fair, they may find that somewhat insulting, I know I did. The nature of addiction is that a bad choice rapidly becomes a non choice, its also extremely painful when the person is in withdrawal I remember it well and even with medication to help it was agony, that pain frequently keeps addicts of all types trapped. I'm sure you didn't mean any harm you're a good and thoughtful contributor, just an unfortunate turn of phraseSmile

Your correct, labelling people who suffered from alcoholism as necessarly irresponsible or worst, stupid, was incorrect and pretty rude. I apologies for it. Considering alcohol addictive "qualitie" many people who suffer from over consumption of alcohol are can feel and are trapped to all intent and purpose. I wanted to express the idea that if alcoholism (or dangerous binge drinking habits who are not necessarly linked to alcoholism) became a very widespread problem, which I don't think it is at the moment, we would have to reconsider the place of alcohol in our society and increase restrictions on its commerce and consomation.

PS: Woo-hoo, my 1000th post, I'm starting to turn into a fixture of this forum.

Freedom is servitude to justice and intellectual honesty.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-12-2016, 11:31 AM
RE: Nanny state on booze
(31-12-2016 11:26 AM)epronovost Wrote:  
(31-12-2016 04:27 AM)adey67 Wrote:  There are quite a few recovering and trying to recover alcoholics on this forum myself included, I'm not sure labeling them stupid and irresponsible wether they are in recovery or not is either productive or fair, they may find that somewhat insulting, I know I did. The nature of addiction is that a bad choice rapidly becomes a non choice, its also extremely painful when the person is in withdrawal I remember it well and even with medication to help it was agony, that pain frequently keeps addicts of all types trapped. I'm sure you didn't mean any harm you're a good and thoughtful contributor, just an unfortunate turn of phraseSmile

Your correct, labelling people who suffered from alcoholism as necessarly irresponsible or worst, stupid, was incorrect and pretty rude. I apologies for it. Considering alcohol addictive "qualitie" many people who suffer from over consumption of alcohol are can feel and are trapped to all intent and purpose. I wanted to express the idea that if alcoholism became a very widespread problem, which I don't think it is at the moment, we would have to reconsider the place of alcohol in our society and increase restrictions on its commerce and consomation.

PS: Woo-hoo, my 1000th post, I'm starting to turn into a fixture of this forum.

No worries mate and I think you have also just made a very good point, the only problem I see with it is that the wretched stuff is just so damned easy to make yourself that's why prohibition failed.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
31-12-2016, 11:40 AM
RE: Nanny state on booze
(31-12-2016 11:31 AM)adey67 Wrote:  No worries mate and I think you have also just made a very good point, the only problem I see with it is that the wretched stuff is just so damned easy to make yourself that's why prohibition failed.

You can also Blame Canada!, we did made a lot of cash selling an absurd quantity of our, usualy stronger, booze South, sometimes with the complicity of our police force. Prohibition usualy doesn't work, especially with addictive products that have a status of cultural icons like beer, whiskey or wine. Education, healthcare services and some restrictions remains our best bet to limit the dangers associated to alcohol abuse.

Freedom is servitude to justice and intellectual honesty.
Find all posts by this user
Like Post Quote this message in a reply
Post Reply
Forum Jump: