Sunday 18 September 2011

More Attacks On Free Choice From Unelected Appointees

Where would we be without unelected supranational organisations, eh?

Fresh from the campaign of denormalisation against tobacco, the World Health Organisation is turning up the heat on those who enjoy a drink or several, as is made clear as crystal in this press release from earlier in the week.

“The harmful use of alcohol is a priority public health concern. The evidence supporting this action plan is large, diverse and persuasive,” said Zsuzsanna Jakab, WHO Regional Director for Europe. “Countries are well aware of the expensive and devastating damage it causes and our action plan is intended to provide them with technical guidance and support on what can and should be done to reduce this harm.”
CAMRA and their ilk will no doubt continue to be unconcerned at the invasive nature of such creeping health hysteria. They're moderate drinkers, after all, and burying one's head in the sand is a brilliant tactic when other vices are being attacked. Why ruffle feathers, eh? It's the 'others' the WHO are coming after, so best just to nod health fanaticism through by way of appeasement. Appeasement works every time.

Well, not really, no.

Alcohol harms people other than the drinker, whether through violence on the street or in the family, or simply by using up government resources.
Is this a way of describing passive drinking? Yes, I believe it very well may be.

Most alcohol is drunk at binges, or other heavy-drinking occasions, which worsen all risks as they are a cause of all types of intentional and unintentional injuries, and of ischaemic heart disease and sudden death.
Sounds quite reasonable, I suppose, unless you are aware of what these people class as a 'binge'.

The UK Government definition of binge drinking was calculated for the sample, i.e. 6 or more units in a single drinking occasion for women and 8 or more units for men.
That equates to a woman drinking more than two-thirds of a bottle of wine on one night of the week or - and this should set a few alarms ringing - a CAMRA beardy drinking three pints of Young's Winter Warmer on one night of the week. OK, I suppose beer afficionados could stay beneath that level, but that isn't hair shirt enough for the WHO. Oh no.

The amount of alcohol consumed over a lifetime increases the risk of dying from an alcohol-related disorder. There is no safe level of drinking, and in many societies no difference in the risk for men and women.
Effectively, every real ale festival is an event that the WHO would like to see stamped out.

And why not? It's not like there is any measurable benefit to alcohol consumption. Not in the eyes of the WHO, anyway.

The total tangible cost of alcohol (costs of health care, production losses, welfare provision, injuries and violence, research and education) to the European Union, as it existed in 2003, has been estimated at €125 billion, 1.3% of gross domestic product. Actual spending on alcohol-related problems accounts for €66 billion of this, while potential production lost due to absenteeism, unemployment and premature mortality accounts for a further €59 billion. Aside from these tangible costs (actual spending on alcohol-related problems of €66 billion and unrealized potential production of €59 billion), alcohol use results in an intangible cost of between €152 and €764 billion.
I should think that a larger percentage than 1.3% of the European population find alcohol to be a pleasurable item on their shopping list, but there is a noticeable lack of recognition of such a fact. Costs without benefits is how they nailed tobacco; it is the method of choice when turning their guns on alcohol; and will be the same routine when the voter-immune health lobby switch to anything else people enjoy which isn't entirely pure.

So, what joys have we to look forward to from our friendly, local, democratically-unaccountable dictatorship in the next eight - yes, eight - years?

The five main objectives of the [European action plan to reduce the harmful use of alcohol 2012–2020] build on previous European plans, and align with the WHO global strategy on alcohol, to:

•raise awareness of the magnitude and nature of the health, social and economic burdens due to alcohol;

•strengthen and disseminate the knowledge base;

•enhance capacity to manage and treat alcohol-related disorders;

•increase mobilization of resources for concerted action; and

•improve surveillance and advocacy.
Marvellous! And all funded by your taxes without any consent whatsoever.

I've said it before, and they'll doubtless one day carry me off in a pine box with it scratched on the side. Without adopting a united front in objecting to assaults on all lifestyle choices - whether you approve of them yourself or not - there is no chance of ever stopping these arseholes in their tracks.

Sadly, a pervasive I'm-all-right-Jack mentality ensures this will never happen, so we're stuck with them until the intolerant and selfish in our midst begin to wake up to the threat their indolence carries for their own self-determination.

Not mentioning anyone in particular, of course. Or did I?


Anonymous said...

or simply by using up government resources...

What about passive pot holing, rock climbing and any activity that might cause an injury ???

Woodsy42 said...

Not as bad as passive sex, which populates the country with kids without fathers and huge benefit bills.

Twenty_Rothmans said...

Zsuzsanna Jakab, WHO Regional Director for Alphabet Soup

A typical worthless bureaucrat looking for typically worthless jobs for typically worthless people. Parasites, like the poor, have always been with us.

I really do want people like Zsuzsanna to fuck off out of my life. I was I were a dictator and have them disappeared.

Ian B said...

Just a reminder here that the man at the WHO in charge of NCDs (Non-Communicable Diseases, which is WHOspeak for lifestyle diseases) is a shia muslim-

Jakab herself is a professional bureaucrat trained by the bolshevik apparat. She isn't a doctor and has negligible scientific credentials (a couple of "public health" courses). She's also an NCD nut--


"And I see the role of WHO as going beyond the Ministers of Health and working very actively with Prime Ministers and Presidents to get their support for the implementation of such policies. If we don't do that we won't be able to improve the health status of the population.”

Anonymous said...

"Effectively, every real ale festival is an event that the WHO would like to see stamped out."

Well, actually, in San Francisco, California, USA - they passed some laws over the last several years and for outdoor street festivals, selling/drinking beer and smoking tobacco - has all been banned.

So yes - WHO probably would like to see ale festivals stamped out.

And talk about dullsville - just go to any of the myriad street festivals in San Francisco throughout the year. You are greeted at the blockades by police patrolling alongisde the no smoking and no drinking signs. It kind of kills the joy out of going to an outdoor festival.

smokervoter said...

Cheesis K. Reist, where's the kill switch to these Perfect World robots? I can't takes no more of these pretentious 5-Year plans to save humanity from barley and hops and tobacco and cows and pigs and sugar and salt. What do they want of us?

Bread and water (and not white bread either).

P T Barnum said...

What is this thing called "government resources" of which they speak? Do they mean our money? That's a nasty little piece of verbal slippage which tells us what the WHO thinks of this planet's inhabitants - we selfishly use up the state's money with our pleasures and we should just stop it before they make us.

david said...

More here - the costs to business by obesity, alcohol, smoking etc .

Can comment

Anonymous said...

sestiersOh. But there are benifits from consuming alcahol.The benifit of research as with any other ailment that the WHO like to investigate.

Little Black Sambo said...

"There is no safe level of drinking."
When you come to think of it, there is no safe level of living.

Anonymous said...

First they came for the smokers, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a smoker. Then they came for the drinkers, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a drinker. Then they came for the motorists, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a motorist. Then they came for the overweight, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't overweight.
Then they came for me, and there was no-one left to speak out for me.
(After Niemoller.)

Sam Duncan said...

“...or simply by using up government resources.”

You see? You see? When government gets big, it uses its bigness to get even bigger.

In a free country, whether or not you wear a seatbelt, or smoke, or drink, is none of my concern. It's your funeral. But when I'm forced to pay for your treatment, and to vote on what form it's to take, it becomes my concern; it becomes everyone's concern, which, in a pseudo-democratic electoral system, gives an excuse to increase the scope of government even further.

There is no safe level of government.

Dr Evil said...

More lies about Scots drinking exposed

Wiki puts us at 18th which fits with other studies I've seen. we do NOT have a problem in the UK

Jon Campbell said...

CAMRA seems to think that real ale will be treated differently from the cooking lager, it may be, the same as Cigar and Pipe Smokers are treated differently from us cigarette smokers.

I hope they can put up some serious resistance to this, but I doubt they'll recognize it as a problem before it is too late.

Feeding Crocodiles etc..

Ian B said...

Indeed Sam. If you chain your slaves together, the one who cannot keep up, or who resists the slave master, becomes a burden to the others, and despised by them.

Anonymous said...

Oh Dear Oh Dear what have I told
Dick and others about mentioning
those hop sniffing goblins,CAMRA
before.They just have to be the Fifth Column of the pub trade,
their Merry England bufoonery and
St George skittles just thin armour for a meaningless ,pointless
non productive contribution to the
English sense of community.
A bit like the Liberal Democrats,
hardly a one with a real job yet
jaw jawing about what all other should drink or eat
Of course there are exceptions
for example The Pub Curmudgeon
who often breaks the mould with
enlightened comment.

Earl Grey

Anonymous said...

There is no safe level of drinking...

Passive drinking kills!!!

The slippery slope has just begun...

but when it comes to alcohol, the antis are 20 years back,starting first with the ban on advertising,taxation..
Maybe one day they will ask for the bars to serve only non alcoholic (ofcourse alcohol will still be legal,but only drunk in private homes...)

PS..Hehehehe I really want to tell some nosmokers friends (who enjoy alcohol) of mine now,in your face!!!

dysfunction said...

Asking questions are genuinely good thing if you are not understanding something entirely, but this article presents good understanding yet.