The WHO Knows Where to Put the Cork


The World Health Organization continues its relentless march toward behavioral control in the name of "health" with a new study pointing out that drinking alcohol can be bad for you.

To show where they think they are going with this, the report explicitly compares demon rum's ill effects with those of the demon weed tobacco, already under fire from many governments and the WHO in an extraordinary example of health-obsessed regulatory social change that would have seemed impossible from the vantage point of 20 years ago. So this is doubtless merely one early volley in a ramped-up war against against our ability to choose to sell, buy, and drink the "unhealthy" substance.

I wrote an extended study of how the WHO pursues an agenda of social control under the guise of concern for health for Reason back in our January 2002 issue, and you can read it here.

NEXT: Meanwhile, in Dhi Qar

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Calling Furbish Lousewart V and the “Revolution of Lowered Expectations”. Again, I’m in awe of Robert Anton Wilson.

  2. Wooohooo! More power to them. When the “Prohibition of Tobacco” amendment finally gets passed, maybe they’ll try out good old alcohol prohibition at the same time. I look forward to that day as a day when the US finally hits rock bottom (or close enough) that millions will take to the streets. This country is overdue for a revolution. It helps keep up the health of the state, don’t ya know?

    Of course the above could just be an insane rant since I haven’t yet had my morning drink & smoke, yet.

  3. Exxxxxcellent! Carrie Nation returns from the grave.

    Isn’t there some quote about those who are ignorant of history…?

  4. No one could every accuse me of being crystal clear, so:

    It was only a small part of RAW?s Schrodinger?s Cat Trilogy. Furbish Lousewart V was elected President of the Unistat Empire. His party, the People?s Ecology Party (PEP), took Ralph Nader?s book Unsafe Wherever You Go and implemented its suggestions. Briefly stated, PEP believed that there was just not enough to go around and something must be done. But, when meat was outlawed, ?steakeasies? opened; a lid of Chesterfields cost $100; millions froze when natural gas for forbidden for environmental reasons; and within two years no one had any more rights than a feudal serf.

    And like the lazy slobs in the book, I don’t think anyone will ever “revolt”. I don’t think its realistic anyway. Economic meltdown? Maybe.

  5. Presumably an international agency, or even a US government agency, could write a report on the bad health effects of alcohol or tobacco without urging governments to ban the offender. The tendency however is to call for action, up to an including prohibition.

    The Consumers Union report “Licit and Illicit Drugs” mentioned that prior to enactment of alcohol prohibition, an international conference had been held on the threat of alcohol. President Wilson had sent representatives to the conference, and they signed the document that resulted, which called on national governments to restrict or ban the alcohol trade.

    When the representatives returned to the US, they urged action by our government because they had made a commitment at the international conference.

    More recently, Prof John Kaplan has pointed to the UN single convention on narcotics as a source of national laws prohibiting marijuana.

    The New World Order – it’s not just about war.

  6. We’re not gonna take it!

  7. Big Brother gives way to Big Mother. Mother knows what’s best for you. Now stub out that butt and eat your greens.

  8. Don’t forget traffic safety:

    The people at the WHO learned long ago to stop wasting their time in fighting infectious disease in 3rd world countries because there is no profit in it for them and so they now go for the money in industrialized nations. Besides, if they help too many poor people survive in undeveloped nations, it would just add to global warming. All right, it was a bad joke in poor taste, but that is what the WHO has become.

  9. Meanwhile, other groups are showing that consuming moderate amounts of alcohol actually brings health benefits.

  10. Expect more of the same as the world, including the U.S., slides slowly, inexorably, toward the ideal of the Nanny State.

  11. They ought to stick to stuff like the clean drinking water problem in the third world. Once they have that done it might make sense to worry about how many scotch & waters people are having. Maybe.

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.