Economic good and all that jazz

Somewhat akin to laws that set reasonable limits on freedom, economists have developed long ago the concept of economic good to set reasonable limits on economic freedom. Competition law and monopolies acts have this as core concepts. It prevents unfair competition and choices for consumers. It is this that whilst condemning the tobacco industry, it is still allowed to operate.
Perhaps it is time for some 'advertising good' to rule over what can or cannot be claimed in the glitzy world of advertising.
As a consumer this scribe remains confused whether soap, face wash or even a brand which 'is not a soap' is the best choice. And it isn't funny that the same company markets all three brands. Internal competition what? Of greater concern is what is being dished out for young impressionable minds in the guise of quick and efficient sanitation.
Any hospital worth its salt goes to great lengths to promote hand washing the way physicians have decreed. The process as with all proper processes, takes time. A patient waiting for an operation would no doubt, appreciate the over adequate scrubbing surgeons go through. The simplest form of hand washing, evocative of the ablution process is
clearly prescribed. Yet, almost as if making a mockery of everything timeless wisdom has ordained, advertising would suggest a prolonged and good wash can be substituted by a liquid soap that works in 10 seconds. What is worse in a world where irreverence is championed is that a mother's advice is indirectly ridiculed. A dermatologist shook his head firmly when this scribe confronted him with the question but remained silent about why no physician publicly debunked this theory. Financially it makes sense as the FMCG companies vending such products just never land in the red.
The first advice of a dermatologist is to replace shampoos with medicated versions; similar with soap. Yet none of the promotions ever talk of any risks associated with those facial products. Rather they would highlight various natural and chemical ingredients that are supposed to do wonders. The age-old natural methods such as turmeric and neem have been rendered unfashionable in the wake of the insatiable profit targets and the chemical progression marches on. No wonder billions of dollars are spent researching such products. And no wonder those billions and plus must be recovered hence the aggressive advertising.
Sodas and fizzy drinks are now singularly frowned upon by physicians for young and old alike. Notwithstanding the debate over obesity matters have come to such a pass as to nudge a company like MacDonalds to openly say they will no longer add fizzy drinks to its kids meal menu. That is another good example that we do not emulate from the west. On the contrary, local investors are finding jazzy new names to fizzy drinks and which have caught the imagination of the young generation. And for some bizarre or economic reason fresh fruit juices are not being promoted as a much better choice. And this from the fastest growing profit centre in business.
The so-called 'energy' drinks are frankly another excuse to entice the youngsters to intoxication as if we needed more of that. This scribe was witness to the sale of one such product. 'What do you have in energy drinks?' queried the customer. 'I've got xxx', responds the shop keeper. 'Is it any good? Does it get a hold of you?', came next query. 'Yes, it does-not too much, just a little', was the response. 'Ok, I'll take it'. Which begs the question -- what ingredients can cause a product to 'get a hold' of you? Or are they legal?
Compare this with any medication that has a sedative where it is clearly mentioned in literature, cautioning against driving or using mechanical machines while under the dosage. Whosoever approved the product obviously did not ask the question. What about providing proper information to customers so they can make an informed choice?  In the meantime, we can sit back and watch the entertainment of youngsters trying to scale an oiled pole throughout the day. To what end- is never explained. But then-obviously not!
(The writer may be reached at mahmudrahman@gmail.com)