The British Medical Association (BMA) recently called for all alcohol advertising, including sport and music sponsorship, to be banned in order to protect "young" people from taking advantage of cheap drinks promotions.
Why can't middle aged people take advantage of these promotions as well?
Anyhoo, the BMA wants a radical rethink of public health policy (another one?), including introducing prohibitions at pubs and bars on deals such as; happy hour, two-for-one purchases and "ladies' nights".
The BMA also want minimum prices for alcohol and higher booze taxes.
Nanny's chief medical officer, Sir Liam Donaldson, earlier this year called for a 50p minimum price for a unit of alcohol.
All very well and good, maybe.
However, I am less than inclined to take advice from a profession that, statistically, has a higher percentage of people (compared with the likes of the ordinary mortals in the street) who drink to "excess" (as per Nanny's own definition), who smoke, are overweight and are substance abusers.
I am most certainly not going to be told by MPs as to what I can/cannot eat or drink, given that MPs equate to the "butchers' profession" when it comes to being populated by obese, heavy drinking, smoking substance abusers (with various mental disorders).
Visit The Orifice of Government Commerce and buy a collector's item.
Visit The Joy of Lard and indulge your lard fantasies.
Show your contempt for Nanny by buying a T shirt or thong from Nanny's Store.
www.nannyknowsbest.com is brought to you by www.kenfrost.com "The Living Brand"
Celebrate the joy of living with booze. Click and drink!
Why not really indulge yourself, by doing all the things that Nanny really hates? Click on the relevant link to indulge yourselves; Food, Bonking, Toys, Gifts and Flowers, Groceries
According to BBC Ceefax doctors are also warning about a "global health catastrophe" if the UN don't agree on limiting climate change.
ReplyDeleteThis would presumably be the "Man Made Global Warming" which has been comprehensively de-bunked by Australian scientist Bob Carter.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FOLkze-9GcI
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=vN06JSi-SW8&feature=channel
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=iCXDISLXTaY&feature=channel
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpQQGFZHSno&feature=channel
Any thing else the medical profession would like to stick their noses in?
By banning happy hour etc. nanny is interfering in the free market and a business owners right to run their business as they see fit. When Nanny sticks her nose in private enterprise watch out. But she doesnt want her sujects to be self reliant so making it touch on the small business owner is part of her plan anyway.
ReplyDeleteWell, at the end of the day, your life's your own (at least for the time being). Most of us don't adhere to Nanny's pronouncements when it comes to exercise, fat intake, veg intake, units of alcohol, body mass index (sheer bollocks), carbon phobias, and the like, and yet somehow, as a species, we seem to be living longer and longer, screwing up Nanny's social security schemes.
ReplyDeletePerhaps Nanny is hoping that we will follow her dictates, and die of sheer boredom!
Cheers.
Live and let live.
ReplyDeleteToo many single issue groups are given too much influence in this country.
I agree with Ken, the doctors are hardly becons of light in relation to alcohol consumption and neither are politicians....Perhaps it is them that blindly accept the advertising message and rush out and get drunk....Perhaps they feel because they aren't sophisticated enough to take responsibility for their own actions they assume the rest of us can't....Still it keeps Nanny going on her policy to punish the many for the actions of the few.
Easy way to curb youngsters' binge drinking. Back in the 1950s/60s when I were a tadpole you couldn't help yourself to crates of cheap chemical fizz from supermarket shelves. You had to go to the licenced grocer or off-licence where an (adult) assistant served you (or didn't if you didn't look old enough). Non of this self-service nonsense. Result of this policy? Very little under-age drinking and nothing like the feral gangs of rat-arsed kids currently infesting our streets. Worked during the so-called "permissive Sixties" so why not now?
ReplyDeleteJust get drink off the supermarket shelves - oops, that would seriously affect the likes of Tescopoly's profits which would never do, would it?
DTW;
ReplyDeleteI agree with much of what you say, I actually think the problem could be solved even easier than the ways you suggest; Why don't they just enforce existing laws? It is already an offence for a person under eighteen to buy or attempt to buy alcohol....It is already an offence to sell anyone under eighteen alcohol......It is already an offence to be drunk and rowdy in a public place....It is already against many local bye laws to drink alcohol in most parks and town centers and it is an offence to steal alcohol......Why don't the police enforce these laws? A zero tolerance approach would do it....Mind you, that would mean them getting off their arses and doing what they're paid to do and they would have to stop going after the motorist all the time so there would be a drop in their Kerching income but, I for one would like to be able to go to my local pub of an evening and walk home with out feeling threatened or abused by kids that are tanked up on booze.....Perhaps forcing parents to take some responsibility for the actions of their little darlings would also help a bit.....I fear for the safety of the drunk little girls that are only about fourteen or so years of age, tanked up, out at two in the morning and incapable of walking due to drink. One must blame the parents for allowing such actions or am I just too old fashioned?
We heard several months back that a 50p/unit minimum cost should be imposed. This was due, we were told, to vast numbers of drunks consuming lethal amounts of alcohol, and 50p/unit would sort that out.
ReplyDeleteNow it's all about 'protecting young people'. Strange how all this 'protecting' has the form of punishing everyone, and also has the happy coincidence of raising tax money.
But Nanny obviously didn't talk to an alcoholic to see how they would respond - I did. My alcoholic correspondent said it would simply make no difference, they would _always_ get the money for drink no matter how much it cost.
Whether getting the drinking money meant cutting back on food, heating or any other expenditure, or even turning to robbery or muggings, an alcoholic will always get money for booze.
So how come Nanny doesn't think of things like that?
Glenn...It's because Nanny doesn't give a monkey's f*ck about "Health"...she just wants control and more of OUR money to waste on her special schemes!!
ReplyDelete