I would much rather be more informed in my daily choices, and since I am not a medical or health expert, these warning labels do just that, they warn me of things that I need to consider to make an informed choice.

Lik is absolutely right. Beyond their disastrous efforts in the public school system, it's unwise to assume the government should take responsibility for informing you on your choices for a healthy consumption of anything.

You might also consider the economic impact of this indiscriminate labeling.

Second, if warning labels are allowed to proliferate, that unneeded proliferation can undermine the effect of warning labels that provide notice of far more dangerous, far more immediate, effects of the use or misuse of a product.

Another excellent point. If you buy an air conditioner they warn you not to eat it…a toaster , they tell you not to take it in the shower with you. Consumers don't pay attention any longer.

Number 1, is it just that this recommendation came from an apparently liberal group that makes it a joke?

Well, no. The problem is that this particular liberal group is becoming a living, breathing reductio ad absurdum. Warning labels can be a good thing. But the proliferation of warning labels eventually reaches the level of the absurd.

Number 2, do you have any doubt that "drinking soda causes obesity, diabetes, tooth decay, and osteoperosis"?

I can't speak for our host, but I won't contest that.

Number 3, what's the harm?

Two answers.

First, if, as a matter of public policy, a soda manufacturer is subjected to liability for a failure to warn of these particular effects, then it could potentiall lower the bar for liability for failure to warn of other potential negative effects. This uncertainty, in turn, creates an environment in which the actors in a given market are less likely to innovate, for fear that they will incur unforeseen liability.

Second, if warning labels are allowed to proliferate, that unneeded proliferation can undermine the effect of warning labels that provide notice of far more dangerous, far more immediate, effects of the use or misuse of a product.

–|PW|–

Number 1, is it just that this recommendation came from an apparently liberal group that makes it a joke?

Number 2, do you have any doubt that "drinking soda causes obesity, diabetes, tooth decay, and osteoperosis"?

Number 3, what's the harm?

I would much rather be more informed in my daily choices, and since I am not a medical or health expert, these warning labels do just that, they warn me of things that I need to consider to make an informed choice.

Are you opposed to ALL informed choices, or just those suggested by a "liberal public interest group"?

Heh heh, I was doing laundry and held off submitting my post.

The instruction manual for my washer indicates that I shouldn’t use gasoline or other additives in there.

Survival of the fittest…If you are stupid enough to do some of these things, then maybe your proper place should be in a straight jacket.

Danger: Couch may attempt to consumer occupants.

Second, if warning labels are allowed to proliferate, that unneeded proliferation can undermine the effect of warning labels that provide notice of far more dangerous, far more immediate, effects of the use or misuse of a product.

Ever see the “warning label” on a cigarette billboard or magazine ad? The designs were to lead your eye away from the warning. It was there, but just as background clutter.
Warning labels about not using your hair dryer in the bathtub or not driving with your sunscreen blocking the windshield are merely a tribute as to why lawyer jokes are so popular!

Ask yourself a question: Is the warning label there to actually provide a warning or is it there to sue anybody who doesn’t have it?

I would much rather be more informed in my daily choices, and since I am not a medical or health expert, these warning labels do just that, they warn me of things that I need to consider to make an informed choice.

This proposed warning label is for fools and lawyers. You have just outed yourself.

Are you opposed to ALL informed choices, or just those suggested by a “liberal public interest group”?

Since when is it everybody else’s job to make sure that you are informed?