Whether it is a government policy or a company’s product, the unintended consequences on public health can be both positive and negative, writes Sheilagh Foley I n Italy, Milan’s city council has announced plans to introduce a ban on selling takeaway food after midnight (the ban includes ice cream and pizza). I am not often awake past midnight, and the thoughts of an after-hours feast of doughy diavolo and slippery gelato send my gut into a convulsive night terror. However, I could see this putting a damper on the common tourist mentality – the right to overindulge at any God-given time they choose.
The proposed new policy is not a direct attack on take-away food or tourists, it’s a measure to curb the street noise Milanese residents must endure. It is interesting that a policy around a food-licensing law is being invoked to influence noise pollution, but the crossover effect doesn’t stop there; surely this will have an impact on people’s health? The reduction in access to late-night food may limit over-eating and bad food choices, making for healthier bodies come the morning after. It likely won’t be long before someone brings up the argument that a street food embargo at the exact time revellers are getting drunk is probably unwise.
Junk food drunkenly consumed in the wee hours can be seen as a break from booze, an opportunity to ‘soak up’ some of the alcohol, and a cry for help. However, the ban may not come to pass as it is reported that business owners .