[jonpalmisc]

I can't believe it's even legal to sell those. That seems simply insane.

[hilux]

My best guess, and I've thought about this a lot, is that chronic illness drives billions of dollars of direct economic activity.

Of course, illness has an even larger cost to society and to overall happiness, but that's much less measurable, and therefore has less effect on public policy.

[voidfunc]

Your body, your choice.

At least with cigarettes there was a public nuisance argument because of the smell and also the secondhand effect. I dont find general public health a compelling argument for restricting sugar.

[xethos]

That's semi-reasonable in America, but less so in any country with single-payer health care. Like smoking, there are serious effects later in life that cost money to treat; this makes for a compelling case for a sin tax IMO, like we have for tobacco and liquor here in Canada.

[ekianjo]

You don't need to restrict it. Just educate people about its effect. That's the least you can do

[setnone]

I'm with you here, those white organic powders should have no restrictions whatsoever.

[baq]

> Your body, your choice.

Corporate profits. They want you to get addicted for recurring revenue.