DesertFox- wrote:
Jay wrote:
DesertFox- wrote:
You can split hairs over the numbers being large enough to be impressive or not, but as a matter of public health, they show a marked increase in needless and preventable deaths.
I'm sorry, but you're using the same logic as the people who told everyone to stop eating bacon because it might cause like 3 cancer deaths and was thus preventable.
But your logic in that case is: if the amount of cancer deaths triples in a decade and why know why, it still does not warrant taking any action.
Mainstream cancer deaths are obviously a significant issue, but let say its an obscure cancer which affected 3,000 people a year and were completely avoidable if people would just not lick five toads a day, would it really warrant spending billions of dollars a year on?
The average person would just say maybe toad-lickers should try to limit their toad-licking to one or two a day, or ideally none at all, and spend the govt time and money on something else, something which afflicts more people and not through their own poor decision making.
No need to eradicate all the toads, toad-traffickers and toad-farmers in the world or wage war on countries whose agricultural capabilities are crimped by geology and climate and whose most profitable export is lickable toads either just because a small number of people can't control their toad-licking impulses.
Last edited by Dilbert_X (2018-02-09 21:52:14)