Why Stop At Junk Food and Cigarettes

Also from Radley Balko comes this story about how smoking bans in English pubs is expect to lead to a rise in female binge drinking.

Smoke-free bars and public houses will attract more female customers and could fuel the rise in binge drinking among women, a report warns.

It points out that as bars and pubs become more appealing venues to women, female customers are more likely to consume larger amounts of alcoholic drinks than before.

And because women are marrying later, they are spending more time in pubs and other venues that serve alcohol, where they are more likely to meet men.

The rise in alcohol consumption among women is causing serious concern for the Government. Doctors say liver disease is now being seen in younger people.

Since the government has seen fit to intervene in what its citizens elect to put inside their bodies, I think it is high time that we reconsider prohibition. After all, cigarettes are bad and becoming more and more restricted and subject to heavy taxation. Junk food seems to be the new target with legislation aimed at fattening snack items becoming more frequent. And of course, there is the laundry list of illicit drugs that are currently illegal. It is high time to take another look at banning alcohol and protecting citizens from themselves.

And think of all the money that can be saved. Less money spent on medical treatment for the side effects of alcohol abuse, less drunk driving incidents, and so forth. Heck, even feminists should get behind this as banning alcohol will mean fewer drunken men and women at things like frat parties.

Frankly, if any American opposes prohibition, why I think they are downright unpatriotic.

That last bit there was sarcastic for those who are sarcasm impaired.

FILED UNDER: Health, US Politics, , , ,
Steve Verdon
About Steve Verdon
Steve has a B.A. in Economics from the University of California, Los Angeles and attended graduate school at The George Washington University, leaving school shortly before staring work on his dissertation when his first child was born. He works in the energy industry and prior to that worked at the Bureau of Labor Statistics in the Division of Price Index and Number Research. He joined the staff at OTB in November 2004.


  1. M. Murcek says:

    Sure, bring back prohibition. Any excuse for me to own a machine gun…

  2. denise says:

    You really mean only the last bit was sarcastic?

  3. The light dawns.

    “Since the governments has seen fit to intervene in what its citizens elect to put inside their bodies ”

    And what other two contentious issues are in the public mind? Abortion and Gay Marriage. A government that can intervene in what its citizens put inside their bodies can surely restrict where male reproductive organs are put. Thus no need for abortions, because the only pregnancies will happen within the happy confines of heterosexual marriages. And no need for Gay Marriages as they would not legally be allowed to be consummated.

    But that still leaves lesbian marriages. Let me get back to you on that, but you got to agree that if the government is the source of solutions, then knocking out abortions isn’t a bad thing.

    p.s. Now what part of the above is sarcasm and what isn’t?

  4. legion says:

    It’s interesting that the article begins with the unstated (and, IIRC, unsupported) assumption that women don’t smoke and/or avoid smoking businesses more than men…

  5. Mark says:

    Gentleman, start your bar-tabs!

  6. akdfjo says:

    Steven, What an idiotic post! To make the jump from an article about an independently-financed study by a private consulting firm to discussion of “government prohibition” is illogical.

    Don’t count on a lame attempt at sarcasm to hide the fact that you can’t think of anything intelligent to say.