Sugar has a “negative impact on society”?
“Refined sugar is notorious for promoting tooth decay and obesity. But last February a group of scientists issued a much more damning charge against the white stuff. Robert Lustig, an endocrinologist at the University of California, San Francisco, argued in the journal Nature that sugar is addictive and toxic—that it can poison the liver, cause metabolic syndrome (increasing the risk of heart disease, stroke, and diabetes), suppress the brain’s dopamine system, and cause us to crave more. Lustig concluded, controversially, that sugar should be regulated like a drug. Alcohol is regulated because of its ubiquity, toxicity, abuse, and negative impact on society, he wrote, and ‘sugar meets the same criteria.'” [Discover]
Being a scientist is additive–the power, the God-like worship from society. Being a scientist should be regulated like a drug.
Lustig makes a good case: alcohol should not be regulated.
And then “progressives” wonder why people like me view them with suspicion. No, they don’t want to take anything from me — they just want to stop the evil sellers of it from victimizing me. And the difference is — what, exactly?
Others have noticed that the only choices “progressives” want to keep are the right of abortion and the right of promiscuous sex.