life doesn’t just imitate satire, but skips right over it and somehow becomes a parody of a parody while simultaneously being all too serious? Because that’s what the FDA seems to be shooting for, skipping right over the giant skull-and-crossbones that Nick Naylor fought so hard against and going straight for giant images of actual corpses. I’ve never smoked, but silliness like this just about makes me want to start. What holds me back is the knowledge that the FDA is simultaneously doing its part to make sure that no one is actually able to quit.
16 thoughts on “What Do You Call It When…”
Comments are closed.
Actually, to be fair to the FDA, they’re following in the lead of the Australian government:
http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2010/11/the-aussies-serious-about-smoking/66218/Report
I vaguely remember hearing about that awhile back, actually. I’m not sure it makes things any less absurd, though (especially when combined with what the FDA’s been doing to the e-cigarette companies).Report
Canada does the same thing. When I got married, many of my friends who were up for the wedding bought packs of cigarettes just for the art on them.Report
The funny part is that they aren’t going to tell anyone that the horrible lip sores are A: on people who’ve smoked a dozen packs a week since before most teenager’s *parents* were born, B: the result of long-term medical conditions that went untreated and could easily have been handled, and C: probably the result of syphilis or other non-smoking diseases.
Instead they go around talking like smoking a cig will immediately and unavoidably turn you into a rot-faced bum.Report
I heard the completely straight-faced presentation of this on NPR and was left thinking – “Am I the only person who realizes how ridiculous this is?”.Report
“Oh, Jaybird. You’re over-reacting to Bloomberg’s attitude toward salt. That’s NYC and besides it’ll never pass and, anyway, even if it did it wouldn’t leak out into the rest of the country.”Report
“Oh, Jaybird. The San Francisco soda ban is just San Francisco and it’s not banning soda in stores.”Report
“Oh, Jaybird. The Happy Meal ban…”
You know, I’m trying to imagine someone defending that to me and I respect all y’all too much to imagine what you’d say.Report
I cannot stand food politics. Locally grown organic crazies make me gag. I react like a vampire shown a cross when I see homeopathic “remedies.”
The happy meal ban is the food version of a moral panic that feels rather degrading to people without money. Still we do have a serious obesity problem so some solution is needed. NOT happy meal bans, I’d suggest things such as the government not organizing industry groups to promote more cheese and ending agri-cultural subsidies.
If you want to get crazy we could ramp-up an educational program to teach nutrition. Crazier still figure away to teach nutritious cooking to adults(website or something probably a bad idea).Report
“Sorry, honey, we can’t get you a happy meal… how’s this? I’ll get you the quarter pounder off of the dollar menu instead, okay? And the fries off of there too. That’s the same price as a happy meal and we can share my drink.”Report
There’s an obesity epidemic, but also an epidemic of crime and incarceration, which means eventually prison cells will be able to put the bars farther apart and save money. It’s a win-win.Report
I like the way you think.Report
Freedom is the freedom to marked unhealthy crap to children. Remove that, and the Gualg isn’t far behind.Report
Market.
Anyway, it’s more likely that parents will take the kids to Mickey D’s and get them bigger burgers and bigger fries from the dollar menu than the smaller ones that come with the Happy Meal.
Consider that a moral victory.
Hey, at least you’re defending people who had really kick’n intentions.Report
More likely than Mickey D’s taking the option of making their food less crappy? No doubt you’re right.Report
Pass a law. Then pass another. Then another.
Watch what happens.Report