WHO recommends limits on alcohol consumption during lockdowns

Is anyone even listening to WHO advice in relation to covid19?
With the exception of the CCP and possibly a few advisers to President Trump.

Solution: say that the NHS will not treat alcohol or drug-related conditions for free.

the who can **** off. They've already blotted their copybook with the public once, i doubt this will improve their image
https://thehill.com/policy/international/europe/493103-who-calls-for-limits-on-alcohol-consumption-during-lockdowns

Being in the position I’m in, i totally agree! But that’s why you’ve gotta do things that are interesting, you’ve got a computer and you’ve got the internet, you can’t tell me drinking alcohol alone is a better alternative
Just typing it makes it sound sad

Just remember that people in England, pay taxes that go towards the NHS which have to take care of idiots who end up in hospital because of too much drinking. Also remember the amount of abusive behaviour goes on from drinking in this country.
We should care for one another, not let each other rot
That’s the principle of national services

I would scrap all VAT as it hits the poorest hardest, but getting rid of taxes on alcohol, cigarettes and sugar/energy drinks is a good place to start.

My position regarding all drugs from caffeine to crack cocaine is that
1) the state should allow anyone over the age of majority (18) to take drugs
2) drug-takers have a right to be informed about the effects of the drug and the harms it can cause in a neutral way - essentially a better FRANK service that isn't ”whooo, scary drugs”
3) if the drug can intoxicate/harm people that don't want to consume it (for instance second-hand tobacco smoke) then its use should be restricted to special areas like smoking gardens in pubs or (formerly) smoking carriages on trains
4) the NHS or any state-run thing paid for by taxpayers should not pay for any damages caused to drug takers by their drug

Essentially ”take what you want so long as you're informed about the consequences and able to consent, but don't expect to get a new liver or whatever with taxpayers' money”

They don't treat anything for free? We all pay in a sort of arbitrary way so it's free at point of delivery right?

You know what I mean. Besides, I don't think your average tramp who turns up at a and e with cirrhosis is going to be a taxpayer.

I would scrap all VAT as it hits the poorest hardest, but getting rid of taxes on alcohol, cigarettes and sugar/energy drinks is a good place to start.

My position regarding all drugs from caffeine to crack cocaine is that
1) the state should allow anyone over the age of majority (18) to take drugs
2) drug-takers have a right to be informed about the effects of the drug and the harms it can cause in a neutral way - essentially a better FRANK service that isn't ”whooo, scary drugs”
3) if the drug can intoxicate/harm people that don't want to consume it (for instance second-hand tobacco smoke) then its use should be restricted to special areas like smoking gardens in pubs or (formerly) smoking carriages on trains
4) the NHS or any state-run thing paid for by taxpayers should not pay for any damages caused to drug takers by their drug

Essentially ”take what you want so long as you're informed about the consequences and able to consent, but don't expect to get a new liver or whatever with taxpayers' money”

Hey, I paid my taxes!

I have a similar outlook however I support the taxation method to pay for the healthcare and administration of a regulated market.

FRANK is still really good resource in the current format, it is my go to for drug information.

For what it's worth it can come across as a bit anti-drug as can some of the information leaflets given out by government agencies at libraries etc.
Just my opinion.

You know what I mean. Besides, I don't think your average tramp who turns up at a and e with cirrhosis is going to be a taxpayer.

Bring back prohibition. The alcohol industry is the new tobacco industry. There's no safe limit for alcohol.




https://www.bbc.com/news/health-45283401

Ahh a nice glass of Cotes Du Rhone and a Dunhill

Blimey, if only. I'm stuck with cheap whiskey and cheaper smokes. Can't complain, though.

Blimey, if only. I'm stuck with cheap whiskey and cheaper smokes. Can't complain, though.

Blimey, if only. I'm stuck with cheap whiskey and cheaper smokes. Can't complain, though.

Yeah 'Golf Cub Whiskey Deluxe' doesn't inspire confidence.

It sounds like that blue bottle David Beckham Haig crap I got a few years back, and the first thing it says on the back is 'best enjoyed with cola'... that's when you know you're really fk'd.

The real kicker here is this: