I wrote a bit ago in the Weekly Standard that obesity is the new global warming, noting that the proposed policy solutions to both “crises” are nearly identical, each increasing the power of the international technocracy exponentially.

Since then, the war against fat has increased in intensity. San Francisco Chronicle columnist, Andrew S. Ross–who writes a fine business column–describes some of the plans that are afoot. From, “Obesity Costs US. Health System $150 Billion a Year:”

“Education and personal responsibility are critical elements of any program to reduce obesity, but not sufficient on their own,” says McKinsey. “Additional interventions are needed that rely less on conscious choices by individuals and more on changes to the environment and societal norms.”
The consulting firm has a list of 74 “intervention levers,” based on dozens of antiobesity pilot programs around the world. They include reducing access to high-calorie foods on supermarket shelves and restaurants menus, eliminating such fare from vending machines in the workplace and schools, and banning TV ads for certain products (as was the case with smoking). “In some cases, regulation may be necessary to level the playing field in relevant industries,” the report states.

Proving that Obamacare has few ultimate limits, the ACA is also now the statutory predicate for aggressive regulatory promulgation:

On Tuesday, the Food and Drug Administration moved to enforce a provision in the Affordable Care Act requiring food establishments with more than 20 outlets nationwide to post calorie counts on menus and vending machines, and with prepared foods sold in supermarkets, grocery stores, movie theaters and amusement parks.

And that will just be the beginning.

But note, we don’t see the same kind of mobilization to fight another scourge that ruins lives and costs the health system tens of billions: promiscuity. (AIDS, STDs, unwanted pregnancies, abortion, suicide attempts, porn addiction, divorce, depression, etc.)

We don’t see concerted joint government/private/popular culture efforts to make sexual self-restraint a social norm. To the contrary, we see efforts to accommodate irresponsible sexual behaviors –including potentially very costly ideas such as having health insurance pay for expensive HIV-fighting drugs for people who are not infected. (By the way, such drugs taken by a gestating mother apparently are harmful to their baby’s developing hearts.)

We also are told that we can’t convince teens to delay sex until adulthood–but for some reason we can persuade them not to smoke or drink? Odd that.

So, the technocracy fights smoking with relish. It is now on the focused hunt against obesity. Regulations are proposed, reeducation campaigns mounted.

But promiscuity? Not so much–or at least, not with the same commitment or dedicated energy. Indeed, anyone who speaks out against sexual irresponsibility will often face charges of being moralistic, bigoted, or a prude.

In a technocracy, health care policy is often as much about politics and culture as keeping people well.