Leaded gasoline damages the health of others without their consent. Restricting pollution is obviously not the kind of "regulation" I'm talking about.
We should abolish mandates requiring nutritional labeling, safety ratings for cars (carmakers far exceed government safety requirements anyway, because it's good for business), restaurant health inspections, and building codes.
That is not to say we shouldn't have nutritional labeling, safety standards, and restaurant inspections. But it should be voluntary, in response to consumer demand for certified safety and quality.
Apple didn't become the largest company in the world by producing shoddy products. The market rewards a reputation for quality. In other words, society evolves toward safer and better quality products over time, whether it's through government mandates or simply changing consumer preferences and increasing consumer awareness.
I would argue that the agricultural and food safety regulations have contributed to the modern industrial agro-business model, because they are naturally geared toward more centralized operations. Small farms that slaughter and butcher animals on the premises for example face significant hurdles due to agriculture regulations. Cookie cutter solutions mandated by the government kill diversity and encourage consolidation and centralisation.
The government can play an active and positive role, by creating voluntary opt-in certification programs, that act as market signals for quality. For example, it can create a voluntary food safety certification that participating companies that meet its requirements can advertise with a seal on their products.
The government can fund public information resources to better inform consumers of the options available on the market and how they compare in quality and risks.
I am not arguing against a government role in the economy. I'm only arguing against mandating a cookie cutter solution that abridges the right of an individual to decide for themselves what risks to incur.