Well, I guess government follows the scientific conclusions and recommendations. Some might turn out to be wrong and we unlearn them. Science does make mistakes, but that's the best we've got. We can't leave it to intuitions of the masses.
Exactly, that's why Freedom is to be left alone to individuals so that they can choose for themselves what best fits their lifestyle.
Governments have roles to play, but telling people what to do and not to do at a private level is certainly not one of them.
You don't think "freedom is the right to be wrong" wasn't something you were taught as a child by adults?
Or are you trying to suggest that your genetics have a role in determining what rights you have or who has power over you?
The human body won't tell you to avoid lifelong tanning to avoid cancer in your 60s, because living to your 60s isn't all that evolutionarily important (and hell, likely made you a drain on your hunter-gatherer tribe). There's no selection pressure.
Apparently there are some arguments that having elders around was a boon for prehistoric tribes. http://www.theguardian.com/science/2011/jul/24/prehistoric-m...
I don't know how much this is validated, but thought it was interesting nonetheless because it seems counter intuitive at first.
I'm somewhat doubtful of this claim. If anything scientists would have everyone avoid sunburn since skin cancer and cataracts.
Tans looking good are a recent phenomenon: A couple hundred years ago light skin was a sign of high status since you could afford to stay indoors instead of having to work in the fields, so light skin was deemed to be more beautiful: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Human_skin_color#Social_status...
Really? This is a naturalistic fallacy. It's out precisely our instincts that cause us to overeat. As has been pointed out our instincts haven't adapted to the abundance and availability of food seen today. In an environment where food is scarce it is evolutionary advantageous to ensure your body had enough calories to make it until the next available meal. And this didn't mean picking the most nutritious food sources, we didn't have that luxury, it meant picking the most available. Only as directed by science do we now know what foods provide the most benefit or determent to our health.
Usually governments make worse decisions than common folks - in about every area (economics, science, medicine, education). I can hardly think of any area where Governments actually did not divert funds resulting in a bad consequence.
Come on now.
> We can't leave it to intuitions of the masses.
Precisely the mindset of the power elite that gets us into so much trouble.
I lean toward valuing individual rights over all else, but this scenario does present a serious challenge to that worldview.
Another contributor to the problem is that people trust science a lot less today than 2 generations ago. They've seen the negative results of a lot of fraud that has been perpetuated under the banner of "science". (E.g. "scientific socialism", the food pyramid, most of psychology, etc...)
Could we be getting better at a faster rate, as a species? Most likely, but it's not like we've halted progress or something.
Totally agree. But are those improvements due to the decisions of central planners?
> What do you mean 'so much trouble'?
Things that come to mind: abysmal outcomes for many in the public school system; skyrocketing prices in healthcare; urban families almost completely destroyed by paternalistic welfare programs; massive suffering and death caused by the warfare state; shredding of the Bill of Rights by the TSA; economic calamity caused by Fed-fueled booms and busts; etc.
Look at the places with the worst outcomes and you will find the most government involvement.
Of course. That doesn't mean they are the problem. It's entirely plausible they are involved because there's a problem. In a system with honey, bees and bears, just because you often see bears involved with honey doesn't mean they are responsible for its creation.
LOL, really ? There are more and more obese people in the US, does that count as getting healthier ? What are your metrics exactly ?
As for living longer lives, that's already clearly proven most of the life expectancy gains happened since we reduced infant mortality to minimum levels, raising therefore lifetime for all individuals on average.