The Mail on Sunday published a nice article this weekend looking at the sugar tax. It's refreshing to see a newspaper asking whether current policies are working rather than agitating for the next 'clamp down'.
It follows Israel's decision to repeal its tax on sugary drinks, something that Norway, Denmark and several US states and counties have already done. 'Public health' activist-academics from the World Federation of Public Health Associations Non-Communicable Diseases
Prevention & Health Promotion and Policy Working Groups (snappy name!) are naturally appalled, but it seems unlikely that anyone is going to die as a result.
Alongside a number of quotes from my good self, the Mail on Sunday article includes some insights from Tom Sanders, professor emeritus of nutrition and dietetics at King’s College London:
Prof Sanders says: ‘The idea behind the tax was right, but I think it’s dishonest to say it works.’He says that data from the Government’s National Diet And Nutrition Survey showed the number of children who report having sugary drinks was already falling by five per cent annually from 2008 onwards – ten years before the tax. There is ‘no evidence’ the sugar tax has accelerated that.
‘A study looked at the impact of introducing minimum unit pricing for alcohol in Scotland. They thought the policy would have a beneficial effect, but heavy drinkers just spent more money on alcohol.
‘Will a broader tax on food work now, when so much is going up in price? Will people eat less, eat better, or consume fewer calories? I suspect they will just spend more of their disposable income on food, rather than cut back.'
I was also on the Medical Minefield podcast discussing this. Listen here. It features someone from Action on Sugar who pretty much admits the sugar tax hasn't worked but supports it anyway (which is Giles Yeo's view in the article too).
No comments:
Post a Comment