Context was the idea of a government banning certain popular foods

  • Dasus@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    edit-2
    5 days ago

    Dictating what you eat and banning things you shouldn’t eat are very different things.

    • credo@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      5 days ago

      Moreover, most governments (unless it’s a religious thing) don’t ban what you can eat… they only regulate items sold and marketed to you as food. E.g. I don’t think we have any laws that ban you from guzzling bleach, but I’m pretty sure you can’t legally pick up a cuppa hot bleach at your local beverage shop. INAL.

      • Muad'dib@sopuli.xyz
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 days ago

        Let’s ban marketing meat as food. You can sell dead animal tubes, but you can’t call them sausages.

      • Dasus@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        5 days ago

        Yeah, they ban the sale of items which shouldn’t be eaten, so there’s none for the consumer to choose, even if they wanted to. I mean obviously I’m referring to somewhat edible things, and not saying that everything that isn’t edible is banned.

        Depends on where you live, but yeah, I imagine drinking dangerous chemicals isn’t necessarily illegal in itself. However I know there is a law in Finland saying you can’t sell like methanol from gas stations to ppl “if you suspect it’s going to be consumed”, because some drunks mightve done that in the past.

        Not really a problem, but just remember such a law existing.