Nothing a short drive to a nearby town won't solve. Incoming black market for beverages.
Nothing a short drive to a nearby town won't solve. Incoming black market for beverages.
More money for corrupt politicians to steal. Keep feeding the machine, and lose your freedom of choice in the process.
Any excuse to increase the amount that people pay through taxes, I suppose.
Where's the money going, exactly? Why isn't there a push for healthy food to be more widely available and cheaper?
Yes, people shouldn't be eating unhealthy food and drink in excess. It leads to health problems, definitely - but actually reigning in the businesses responsible for selling the products in the first place seems like a more efficient tactic overall.
Honestly I assumed it was not great myself but really not seeing too much bad about it https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aspartame
I'm sure this has nothing to do with smoking being on a major decline and therefore less revenue from the massive sin tax placed on tobacco.
I happen to have actually made aspartame and done a bit of toxicology research on it, so I know that it's not that bad. I want to find out if he thinks it causes cancer or not. There are definitely some negatives to using aspartame, mainly that it cheats your brain into thinking it has gotten sugar when it hasn't, and that can promote hunger.
Beverage tax is fucking stupid if people want to drink a beverage let them.
In regards to the topic at hand, aspartame is bad because people think that by drinking "diet" it´s "healthy" or at least not bad for you. Aspartame does the sugar trick on the brain and in many that can actually promote hunger, thus still being a cause of obesity.
However there are many other potential side effects.
http://articles.mercola.com/sites/ar...d-to-food.aspx
Someone was asking why "diet" products would be banned. My guess is aspartame.
- - - Updated - - -
0.01%.. The "genetic and medical conditions" are usually BS. Sure some have it harder than others, but very very few "can´t" lose weight.
- - - Updated - - -
Then let them pay for it and also help contribute to the added health costs their soda drinking may cause others (taxes). Being selfish in modern society shouldn´t be free when so many expenses are collective.
Last edited by mmoc3eb006e951; 2017-01-06 at 08:36 AM.
i think jamie oliver tried this in the UK
can imagine how well that went down, him being a bell-end and all
I wasn´t aware of that, just picked the first link. I am no aspartame expert, nor claiming to be. Reports seem to vary a lot on the subject. However it does seem to account for a large portion of adverse reactions to food additives, and there seem to be a long list of possible effects.
The FDA should be a better source.
http://www.fda.gov/ohrms/dockets/dai...emc-000199.txt.
Like I stated in a previous post, it was merely my best guess as to why "diet" and "light" products might be taxed as well..
- - - Updated - - -
Wouldn´t it be better to not drink either?
Some poster previously called this a "war on the poor"... Isn´t the real war on the poor subsidizing all the unhealthy crap so they can´t afford healthier alternatives?