Folic acid should be added to rice as well as flour to prevent hundreds of cases of 'tragic' birth defects every year, experts have said today.
And it's not just expanding the range. It's upping the dose too!
Up to 800 cases could be avoided every year if the nutrient was also added to rice and doses were quadrupled, they claimed.
Why are they dragging their heels? Why aren't they rolling over for these 'experts' like they usually do?
Ministers are thought to have stalled because they feared being accused of 'mass medication' and acting like a 'nanny state'.
Oh, I think that ship done sailed...
Professor Dame Lesley Regan, a gynaecologist at Imperial College's St Mary's Hospital Campus, said there are scientific, medical, ethical and economic reasons for administering the 'correct dose' of folic acid for 'maximum protection'.
It's amazing how easy it is to ensure that these all combine to match your own personal 'ethics', isn't it?
Professor Neena Modi, an expert in neonatal medicine at Imperial College London, said ... Women who avoid gluten or whose main source of carbohydrate is rice will be disadvantaged, Sir Nicholas warned. And mothers from ethnic minority backgrounds, 'who predominantly eat rice, not flour', are already up to two-and-a-half times more at risk of their baby having neural tube defects, Professor Modi said.
'We have a major issue with health disparities and the current proposals will widen these,' Professor Modi said.
How dare those people not get with the programme and take their medicine, eh, Neena?
I envision some third world sweat shop workers injecting every grain with hyperdeemic nerdles.
ReplyDeleteLOL!
DeleteWell duh! Collectivists ... collectivise, everything.
ReplyDeleteYou aren't an individual, you are a category (and each category is defined by the lowest common denominator, of course. So, if some tiny fraction of a percentage of a category do/or don't do something then, of course, everyone in that category is assumed to do likewise).
It defines their entire world-view, and every demand and action they take. (Throw in the delusion that "everyone is 'just like them', knows what they 'know' and thinks as they do, so if they make different choices, they are doing so because of the only reasons 'they' would do so", and you can predict everything that happens subsequently).
That any (predictable) "unintended consequences" are then (gleefully) leapt upon as evidence that further 'interventions' are needed (requiring, quel surprise, more money and power funnelled their way), shows both that they always know exactly what they're doing, and could care less about the supposed targets of their 'concern'.
Seriously, look at any universal, blanket, one-size-fits-all legislation (or demands for such) and, when you look closely, you'll find a single-issue fanatic, a totalitarian leftist and a grifter profiteering behind it all.
And worst? As Chesterton warned us:
“Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.”
Chesterton would rejoice to see his words become so prophetic...
ReplyDelete