As a current imbiber, yes absolutely. In fact they should stick on a picture of a fatty liver disease liver vs a healthy one like they do on smokes.
Under previous guidance, the CCSA recommended a maximum of 10 standard alcoholic drinks per week for women and 15 for men. Now, it says no amount of alcohol is completely safe, and recommends a maximum of two drinks a week to stay within the lowest risk threshold.
I’m surprised it’s that high.
I think it makes sense to put labels on alcohol though considering weed and cigarettes already have massive warning labels. Seems like legacy or grandfathered in policy that we don’t already.
I wish they’d put the number of standard drinks on the can. Having to calculate it for a 500ml 6% drink or a 150ml 8% or whatever gets tedious.
Alcohol causes cancer, so yes.
So does exhaust from cars. I do think we should force cars to have a giant print of text on them to warn of the risks of cancer and death.
I love all the people who leave their cars idling during daycare drop off.
Thanks for pumping all those fumes straight into my kid’s face.
It’s mental that alcohol has different rules concerning labeling. It should have the nutritional value like everything else.
Good do it. My father died 2 years ago from alcohol related cancer it was fucking horrible.
If it saves even one person from going through that or watching their loved one go through it, it’s worth it.
I don’t think they need cancer warnings, they needs “this very addictive substance can irreparably ruin your life if you don’t moderate” warnings
The idea that putting labels on every bottle is about “letting Canadians know and informing them better”, is flat out horseshit.
That’s what education campaigns are for. Putting labels on every bottle is about reminding / nagging people every single time they try and enjoy having a drink to try and make them enjoy it less and change their behaviour.
You can be on board with that or not, but let’s stop lying with the ‘its about education’ comments.
Warning labels do work. Turn the bottle the other way or pour in a glass if you don’t want to see it. The doctor knows more than you do.
We found that graphic warnings had a statistically significant effect on smoking prevalence and quit attempts. In particular, the warnings decreased the odds of being a smoker (odds ratio [OR] = 0.875; 95% CI = 0.821–0.932) and increased the odds of making a quit attempt (OR = 1.330, CI = 1.187–1.490). Similar results were obtained when we allowed for more time for the warnings to appear in retail outlets.
https://academic.oup.com/ntr/article/15/3/708/1091051
Pictorial warning labels proposed by FDA create unfavorable emotional reactions to smoking that predict reduced cigarette use compared to text alone, with even smokers low in self-efficacy exhibiting some reduction. Predictions that low self-efficacy smokers will respond unfavorably to warnings were not supported.
Where did I say that they didn’t work?
I said that the method of working was through nagging, not education.
I think you seriously underestimate the number of people who are completely unreachable with new information unless it is put directly in front of their faces.
And how many of those people actually read the fine print on labels?
I’ve seen a ton of empty cigarette boxes over the years (I don’t smoke) but I’ve never bothered actually reading the warnings.
Should put more than just cancer warning…like warning about losing your house, your family, your dignity.
I mean, it’s pretty well known that alcohol isn’t healthy. Do we need a warning about every risk it poses? Cancer, liver damage, fetal alcohol syndrome, impaired driving, addiction, etc.
It’s a pretty big list.
I have about had it with this safety/nanny culture.
Need to start putting warnings on bureaucrats instead stating, Will waste your tax money, and micromanage your life.
Research has shown that warning labels on dangerous products such as cigarettes reduces deaths so it’s clearly not a waste of money.
What’s next a warning label on breathing? Warning, failure to inhale and exhale will cause oxygen deprivation and death?
That’s a false equivalence and a strawman made into a sentence.
Maybe they should put a warning label on cars too, “Warning: May collide with children.”
know the risks, people!
they should put a warning label on pens. “Warning: May stab in eye”
they should put a warning label on pens. “Warning: may stab in eye”
That’s a bad faith strawman.
You’re a bad faith straw, man!
Pen danger to the eye is obvious to most people. Cancer caused by a lifetime of drinking is not.
Never put salt in the eyes.
Never put salt in the eyes.
Always put salt in the eyes
Unironically 100% agree with the labeling of cars.
While not strictly required, where i live you get to shave off a few months between the first and second levels of your license if you take lessons, and a required part of those lessons is watching an uncensored video on the consequences of drunk driving, speeding in school zones and not respecting semis. It left quite the impression.
