Taxing fizzy drinks is not the solution
Doctors have called for fizzy drinks to be taxed so that prices rise by at least 20 per cent and for junk food adverts to be banned before the 9pm watershed. It is the latest attempt to curb the increasing problem of obesity. The UK is one of the world's heavyweights in this respect with about a quarter of adults classed as obese and the figure predicted to double by the year 2050.
The latest suggestions, which also include a reduction in fast food outlets near schools and leisure centres, come from the Academy of Medical Royal Colleges, an organisation which represents most doctors in the UK.
It seems that sugary drinks have been singled out for special attention because they often contain not much more than sugar and water.
Even so, this approach does seem a little piecemeal.
Cheap Van Insurance For 17,18 & 19 Year Old Drivers - Call Insure365 01782 898188, Free Legal Protection Cover Included valued at £25.00!
Terms: 1 Voucher Per Customer
Contact: 01782 898188
Valid until: Monday, June 24 2013
There are many other products which contain high levels of sugar with little nutritional benefit and a good many more which are also heavy in fat and salt.
This issue surely requires a more comprehensive strategy than singling out a particular type of product.
Our preference would be for more information rather than more taxation.
As we have said in this column previously, consumers would most benefit from a simple, uniform and prominent labelling system containing information about calorie content and the quantities of fat and salt as well as an indication of whether the amount of each is high or low.
The food industry should be legally required to display this information and it should be applied to all products both in retailers and in restaurants, pubs and cafes.
This would allow consumers to make better informed decisions about what they eat and it would encourage the food industry to make sure the products it offers are as healthy as possible.
At the moment, this sort of information is generally available on products but it is neither prominent nor easy to understand, and is generally absent altogether in restaurants, cafes and so on.
What is needed is a system of labelling which is consistent and easily comprehensible at a glance. This is not particularly difficult to achieve and it would be a big step forward in dealing with the obesity crisis.
7 Comments
by Strojo
Wednesday, February 20 2013, 5:41PM
“Yes, taxing fizzy drinks is not the solution. That's why the report doesn't call for a tax on fizzy drinks. It calls for a tax on drinks that are high in sugar. Whether or not they're fizzy is irrelevant. Would be nice if the LM could get basic details like that correct.”
by Bob491
Tuesday, February 19 2013, 7:12PM
“Quote: "The answer is more fresh food at lower prices, more education on nutrition and cookery, cheaper power for cooking."
I agree, but it can be paid for by increasing the tax on sugary, fatty, salty or other unhealthy processed foods to at least 100%. 20% is far too little.
For those who want an energy fix, try a banana which currently is about the cheapest fruit available.”
by karinfall1955
Tuesday, February 19 2013, 1:37PM
“Not sure whether taxation would work but certainly agree that if it did fizzy sugary drinks should be targetted. The only 'goodness' they contain is water, also the calories are totally 'empty' unlike some fatty foods which do provide some nugtritional benefits and to further add insult to injury they rot teeth!! They are the 'cigarettes' of the food world.”
by kazza1966
Tuesday, February 19 2013, 1:25PM
“How about an extra tax on PlayStations etc?
No mention of these and the amount of time spent in front of them and the contribution of inactivity coupled with the sugary drinks and unhealthy food.
The foods and drinks have been around a lot longer than the obesity issue. Isn't it time to look at the lazy lifestyles that are led more these days than just blaming the food industry.”
by Hamilton_Paul
Tuesday, February 19 2013, 11:05AM
“Is putting 20% on a bottle of fizzy drink going to stop people buying it? A 500ml bottle of fizzy drink can range from about £1 to about £1.80 depending where you buy it.
Why is it always tax increases? what about decreasing prices for non sugary drinks? and healthier food.
If I want one bottle of sugary drink after I have done a long run to put some energy back in my body why should I have to pay more because people who should know better over indulge?
I feel we are basically have stupidity taxes. Because some people who should know better either can not be bothered or rely on others to work things out for them. There is GDA (Guideline Daily Amount) on bottles of sugary drinks so people have no excuses.”
by Just_Saying
Tuesday, February 19 2013, 10:42AM
“llamalamb - agree with your first sentence but not the second.
(Nutritionally) 'Poor' food is usually more expensive, highly advertised, processed food.
Fresh food that people 'process' themselves is usually cheaper.”
by llamalamb
Tuesday, February 19 2013, 8:05AM
“The answer is more fresh food at lower prices, more education on nutrition and cookery, cheaper power for cooking.
Poor food is eaten by poor people out of necessity, not choice.”