Redactor asks the tough question of the Surgeon General: Well then why don't you show how many calories are in alcoholic beverages?

Murthy argues in his advisory, noting alcohol consumption is to blame for nearly one million preventable cancer cases in the U.S. over the last decade. About 20,000 people die every year from those alcohol-related cancer cases

They expect people who are drinking enough to get cancer from it to be so into the health food craze to be scared of that? You could eat like 2 fewer hot pockets per year and it would do as much good. Most of these people probably smoke, which is where you've actively made a decision that you're okay with getting cancer.

The hypocrisy of this is just astounding. We put warning labels on alcohol products about stuff that everyone knows (you might actually be worse at driving! ) but for some reason reason out of all food and drink, booze has an exception for nutritional information. Why? When did this start? What possible justification is there for this? Why in the frick would you print any kind of warning on it if you won't even just tell women it's going to make them fat? Why do we go through this charade of pretending the government in Elliot Ness when there's tax incentives for the wine industry, the beer industry, the weed industry, the mushroom industry. Extreme taxes on the tobacco industry because I guess they were actually the ones really hurting people.

The Surgeon General's office has not replied to MNN's request for comments.

Also BTW am I literally the first fricking person in America who ever noticed this? I have never in my entire life ever heard anyone notice that alcohol makes your product less regulated.

!boozers !noalcohol