Share.

    24 Kommentare

    1. Yallberforce on

      What with current health/lifestyle trends they’d be better off just putting nutritional information on it at this point.

    2. As was noted in the article, the Yukon tried this before but stopped the pilot when the alcohol industry threatened to sue:

      [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Territories_Alcohol_Labels_Study](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northern_Territories_Alcohol_Labels_Study)

      > *The Northern Territories Alcohol Labels Study (NTAL study) was a scientific experiment in Canada on the effects of alcohol warning labels. It was modified after lobbying from the alcohol industry, and later relaunched with industry-advocated experimental design changes: omitting the „Alcohol can cause cancer“ label, not labelling some alcohol products, and shortening the time period (from eight to four-and-a-half months). Enough data was gathered to show that all of the labels used in the study were simple, cheap, and effective, and it recommended that they should be required worldwide.*

      > *John Streicker, the Yukon Minister Responsible for the Yukon Liquor Corporation, stopped the study just before Christmas. He did not believe lobbyists‘ claims about the medical facts and instead believed his chief medical officer of health that the labels were truthful. __He stopped the study because he did not wish Yukon to risk a long and expensive lawsuit__ and thought leadership should be taken by the federal government after the COVID-19 pandemic.*

    3. Whole_Cranberry5734 on

      People already know what their consuming.

      The anti-alcohol lobby is pathetic, worse then vegans with their self righteous attitude.

    4. Man, booze consumption is down among young people. Society in general is drinking less. I say just let it be. At this point it seems like society is pulling away from it naturally. Why mess with that?

    5. Panpancanstand on

      At this point, if you do not know that alcohol is bad for you, then I have serious doubts a label is going to help.

    6. thelingererer on

      Well obviously with pictures just like we have on cigarette packages and no exceptions for expensive champagne!

    7. This is a rather obvious move. Kinda weird we have a warning on a sugary pop drink but not a sugary alcohol drink. The only difference is lobbying

    8. It blows my mind to think how many millions of dollars gets sank into processes like this… as if everyone doesn’t already know alcohol is bad for you.

      Reality check, regulators. People don’t drink booze for the health benefits…

    9. IskandarAli on

      I hate this convo. Alcohol has been a staple of our diets for thousands of years, so was meats of various kinds. Suddenlycancer rates skyrocketed and they started pointing towards alcohol. Why point towards one of the only factors that is consistent? Why not point towards the new factors like additives, chemicals, birthcontrols and so on.

    10. imcclelland on

      This is the dumbest crap. It didn’t work on cigarettes, it’s not going to work here. No one have ever looked and those and just then realized that it wasn’t good for them.

    11. No_Session6015 on

      Finally! But also bs. They do it to culturally taboo products like tobacco and marijuana. It’s long over due

    12. Whole_Cranberry5734 on

      There’s literally people doing heroin, Crack and meth on the street and alcohol is what were concerned about?

    13. AcanthocephalaNo2544 on

      They would be useful in Quebec for alcohols we can’t have anymore because people didn’t play nice with them, such as 99% alcohol.

    Leave A Reply