Article Text

Download PDFPDF
Equity and preventive regulations
  1. Elizabeth Fenton
  1. Correspondence to Dr Elizabeth Fenton, Bioethics Centre, University of Otago, Dunedin 9016, New Zealand; elizabeth.fenton{at}otago.ac.nz

Abstract

In ‘Obesity, equity and choice’ (J Med Ethics 2018;0:1–7. doi:10.1136/medethics-2018-104848), Timothy Wilkinson argues that preventive regulations to address obesity, such as taxes on sugary drinks, are at worst inequitable and at best fail to increase or improve equity. He concludes that we do not yet have good reasons to adopt them. I argue that equity considerations are not as problematic for preventive regulations as Wilkinson suggests.

  • public health ethics
View Full Text

Statistics from Altmetric.com

Footnotes

  • Contributors The author is the sole contributor to the article.

  • Funding The authors have not declared a specific grant for this research from any funding agency in the public, commercial or not-for-profit sectors.

  • Competing interests None declared.

  • Provenance and peer review Not commissioned; internally peer reviewed.

  • Patient consent for publication Not required.

Request Permissions

If you wish to reuse any or all of this article please use the link below which will take you to the Copyright Clearance Center’s RightsLink service. You will be able to get a quick price and instant permission to reuse the content in many different ways.

Linked Articles

  • Extended essay
    Timothy M Wilkinson