Quote:
Originally Posted by Chris
Yes, people are harmed and killed by alcohol and it puts a strain on the NHS. The problem is, you seem to be arguing for the same regulations as have been applied to tobacco, despite alcohol causing only 10% of the deaths tobacco does.
Regulations must be proportionate. I suggest that the existing restrictions on how alcohol may be bought and sold and where it may be consumed are already proportionate to the risk.
To add further context to this, obesity is reckoned to cause about 30,000 deaths in the UK each year (I.e. more than three times as many as alcohol). About 9,000 of those deaths are people aged under 65. Obesity is a far more serious problem, yet far less has been done to tackle the availability of cheap, high calorie processed foods.
|
Oh so the issue is the amount of deaths not the cost to the country.......?
Completely agree on the obesity again should be regulated and taxed much more stringently than it is
To quote earlier
'Smoking has a huge cost to the NHS - an estimated £5.2bn - but boozed-up Britons put a massive dent in the overall economy because of the additional £11bn burden on the criminal justice system. All too often, drinking results in violence, either at home or out on the streets.
'The cost works out at a staggering £1.43m every hour, and according to the report, is enough to keep more than 260,000 police officers on the streets, or 278,000 nurses working in A&E.'
So the question begs when the NHS,police etc. Are having their budgets crippled. And there's firm evidence to show that alcoholi in real terms costs the country more than cigarettes (I don't have the figures to hand for obesity but would suggest it's very high also) why are smokers the ones beIng hit the most? Surely it should be all three?