Follow @PoliticsIE
 
 
 
Page 1 of 7 12345 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 63

Thread: Evidence in many countries proves that taxes on fizzy drinks would deter consumption

  1. #1
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Posts
    13,693
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default Evidence in many countries proves that taxes on fizzy drinks would deter consumption

    See press release below. The key point:

    "In their combined analysis of 32 studies (all from high-income countries from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development), the authors' model predicted a 0.02% fall in energy intake from saturated fat for each 1% price increase. Likewise, a 10% increase in the price of soft drinks could decrease consumption by 1% to as much as 24%."

    The Minister of Health Reilly's request for a tax on sugary drinks in the budget was ignored by Finance Minister Noonan who presumably thinks preserving jobs in the junk food industry is more important than measures to stem the obesity epidemic sweeping Ireland.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Public release date: 11-Dec-2012
    [ Print | E-mail | Share Share ] [ Close Window ]

    Contact: Sumrina Yousufzai
    syousufzai@plos.org
    415-568-3164
    Public Library of Science
    Taxes on sugary drinks and high fat foods could improve health
    Press release from PLOS Medicine

    Taxes on soft drinks and foods high in saturated fats and subsidies for fruit and vegetables could lead to beneficial dietary changes and potentially improve health, according to a study by experts from New Zealand published in this week's PLOS Medicine.

    Helen Eyles and colleagues from the University of Auckland and the University of Otago (Wellington) reached these conclusions by reviewing all relevant modelling studies that investigated the association between food pricing strategies, food consumption and chronic diseases (often referred to as non-communicable diseases, which includes conditions such as cardiovascular disease and diabetes).

    In their combined analysis of 32 studies (all from high-income countries from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development), the authors' model predicted a 0.02% fall in energy intake from saturated fat for each 1% price increase. Likewise, a 10% increase in the price of soft drinks could decrease consumption by 1% to as much as 24%.

    In contrast, the authors found that a 10% decrease in the price of fruits and vegetables could increase consumption by between 2% to 8%. However, the authors found evidence to suggest that such a subsidy might result in compensatory purchasing with people buying less of other healthy products, such as fish, or more of less healthy products (e.g. sugar), which may not be beneficial to health overall.

    The authors also found that studies that compared food pricing strategies by socio-economic group estimated improved health outcomes for those on lower incomes, which may be relatively greater than for those on higher incomes. This suggests that food pricing strategies also have the potential to reduce inequalities.

    The authors say: "Based on modelling studies, taxes on carbonated drinks and saturated fat and subsidies on fruits and vegetables are associated with beneficial dietary change, with the potential for improved health. "

    The authors continue: "It must be noted that the impact of any given food tax or subsidy is likely to differ by country depending on factors such as the type of tax system implemented, health status, co-existent marketing, cultural norms, expendable income, and the social role of food."

    The authors add: "Given the limitations of the current evidence, robust evaluations must be planned when food pricing policies are implemented by governments."

    The authors conclude: "Additional research into possible compensatory purchasing and long-term population health outcomes for different socio-economic groups is needed."

    ###

    Funding: This research is funded by the Health Research Council of New Zealand (grant # 10/077). HE holds a Heart Foundation of New Zealand research fellowship (grant # 1463). CNM holds the Heart Foundation of New Zealand Senior Fellowship (grant # 1380). NN and TB are funded by a Health Research Council of New Zealand Programme Grant (#10/248). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

    Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

    Citation: Eyles H, Ni Mhurchu C, Nghiem N, Blakely T (2012) Food Pricing Strategies, Population Diets, and Non-Communicable Disease: A Systematic Review of Simulation Studies. PLoS Med 9(12): e1001353. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001353



    IN YOUR COVERAGE PLEASE USE THIS URL TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO THE FREELY AVAILABLE PAPER (THIS LINK WILL BECOME LIVE WHEN THE EMBARGO LIFTS):

    PLOS Medicine: Food Pricing Strategies, Population Diets, and Non-Communicable Disease: A Systematic Review of Simulation Studies

    CONTACT:

    Helen Eyles
    National Institute for Health Innovation
    University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
    h.eyles@nihi.auckland.ac.nz


    [ Back to EurekAlert! ] [ Print | E-mail | Share Share ] [ Close Window ]

  2. #2
    Politics.ie Member ruserious's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    In the Bunker...Returning Fire!
    Posts
    29,313
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)

    Default

    You take a lot off a cork man, but ye'll never get his Tanora. No Surrender.
    Boycott the "Irish" Sun rag.

  3. #3
    Politics.ie Member neiphin's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    Lake Wobegon
    Posts
    5,512
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    "If we VOTE YES there will be no more austere budgets. Fact " Hammer, mayday 12'

  4. #4
    Politics.ie Member 'orebel's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2009
    Location
    In corrigible
    Posts
    20,271
    Mentioned
    2 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ruserious View Post
    You take a lot off a cork man, but ye'll never get his Tanora. No Surrender.
    Posh bastid. We had TK red lemonade.
    "It is important therefore that I clarify to the House that in the first instance there are significant monies within Anglo-Irish to take the strain of loan losses arising over the next three or four years, before State support is engaged." Brian Lenihan 15/01/09

  5. #5
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    May 2008
    Posts
    4,187
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by patslatt View Post
    See press release below. The key point:

    "In their combined analysis of 32 studies (all from high-income countries from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development), the authors' model predicted a 0.02% fall in energy intake from saturated fat for each 1% price increase. Likewise, a 10% increase in the price of soft drinks could decrease consumption by 1% to as much as 24%."

    The Minister of Health Reilly's request for a tax on sugary drinks in the budget was ignored by Finance Minister Noonan who presumably thinks preserving jobs in the junk food industry is more important than measures to stem the obesity epidemic sweeping Ireland.

    -----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

    Public release date: 11-Dec-2012
    [ Print | E-mail | Share Share ] [ Close Window ]

    Contact: Sumrina Yousufzai
    syousufzai@plos.org
    415-568-3164
    Public Library of Science
    Taxes on sugary drinks and high fat foods could improve health
    Press release from PLOS Medicine

    Taxes on soft drinks and foods high in saturated fats and subsidies for fruit and vegetables could lead to beneficial dietary changes and potentially improve health, according to a study by experts from New Zealand published in this week's PLOS Medicine.

    Helen Eyles and colleagues from the University of Auckland and the University of Otago (Wellington) reached these conclusions by reviewing all relevant modelling studies that investigated the association between food pricing strategies, food consumption and chronic diseases (often referred to as non-communicable diseases, which includes conditions such as cardiovascular disease and diabetes).

    In their combined analysis of 32 studies (all from high-income countries from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development), the authors' model predicted a 0.02% fall in energy intake from saturated fat for each 1% price increase. Likewise, a 10% increase in the price of soft drinks could decrease consumption by 1% to as much as 24%.

    In contrast, the authors found that a 10% decrease in the price of fruits and vegetables could increase consumption by between 2% to 8%. However, the authors found evidence to suggest that such a subsidy might result in compensatory purchasing with people buying less of other healthy products, such as fish, or more of less healthy products (e.g. sugar), which may not be beneficial to health overall.

    The authors also found that studies that compared food pricing strategies by socio-economic group estimated improved health outcomes for those on lower incomes, which may be relatively greater than for those on higher incomes. This suggests that food pricing strategies also have the potential to reduce inequalities.

    The authors say: "Based on modelling studies, taxes on carbonated drinks and saturated fat and subsidies on fruits and vegetables are associated with beneficial dietary change, with the potential for improved health. "

    The authors continue: "It must be noted that the impact of any given food tax or subsidy is likely to differ by country depending on factors such as the type of tax system implemented, health status, co-existent marketing, cultural norms, expendable income, and the social role of food."

    The authors add: "Given the limitations of the current evidence, robust evaluations must be planned when food pricing policies are implemented by governments."

    The authors conclude: "Additional research into possible compensatory purchasing and long-term population health outcomes for different socio-economic groups is needed."

    ###

    Funding: This research is funded by the Health Research Council of New Zealand (grant # 10/077). HE holds a Heart Foundation of New Zealand research fellowship (grant # 1463). CNM holds the Heart Foundation of New Zealand Senior Fellowship (grant # 1380). NN and TB are funded by a Health Research Council of New Zealand Programme Grant (#10/248). The funders had no role in study design, data collection and analysis, decision to publish, or preparation of the manuscript.

    Competing Interests: The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.

    Citation: Eyles H, Ni Mhurchu C, Nghiem N, Blakely T (2012) Food Pricing Strategies, Population Diets, and Non-Communicable Disease: A Systematic Review of Simulation Studies. PLoS Med 9(12): e1001353. doi:10.1371/journal.pmed.1001353



    IN YOUR COVERAGE PLEASE USE THIS URL TO PROVIDE ACCESS TO THE FREELY AVAILABLE PAPER (THIS LINK WILL BECOME LIVE WHEN THE EMBARGO LIFTS):

    PLOS Medicine: Food Pricing Strategies, Population Diets, and Non-Communicable Disease: A Systematic Review of Simulation Studies

    CONTACT:

    Helen Eyles
    National Institute for Health Innovation
    University of Auckland, Auckland, New Zealand
    h.eyles@nihi.auckland.ac.nz


    [ Back to EurekAlert! ] [ Print | E-mail | Share Share ] [ Close Window ]
    Best leave parenting to parents not politicians.

  6. #6
    Politics.ie Member ruserious's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    In the Bunker...Returning Fire!
    Posts
    29,313
    Mentioned
    1 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by 'orebel View Post
    Posh bastid. We had TK red lemonade.
    Posh? You're the posh boy! Tanora on a Sunday, Red Cadet every other day!
    Boycott the "Irish" Sun rag.

  7. #7
    Politics.ie Member Tin Foil Hat's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    2,900
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    High taxes don't work for alcohol. They don't work for tobacco. And they won't work for sugar.
    Anyway, sugar is only a part of the cause of our obesity epidemic. Fat is a major part, as are carbs. Both are necessary components of a balanced diet. You can't tax large portion sizes of foods that are otherwise healthy, necessary even, in sensible does. Lack of exercise is probably the biggest problem. How about a ban on banning running in school playgrounds for starters?
    The only affect of a sugar or fat tax would be a new addiction - an addiction of our government to the excise duties on sugary or fatty foods.

  8. #8

    Default

    Why did you exclude this important point from your 'key point'?

    '....and subsidies for fruit and vegetables could lead to beneficial dietary changes and potentially improve health'.

  9. #9
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    2,421
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by patslatt View Post
    See press release below. The key point:

    "In their combined analysis of 32 studies (all from high-income countries from the Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development), the authors' model predicted a 0.02% fall in energy intake from saturated fat for each 1% price increase. Likewise, a 10% increase in the price of soft drinks could decrease consumption by 1% to as much as 24%."

    The Minister of Health Reilly's request for a tax on sugary drinks in the budget was ignored by Finance Minister Noonan who presumably thinks preserving jobs in the junk food industry is more important than measures to stem the obesity epidemic sweeping Ireland
    Coca Cola is probably the largest, most powerful, global corporate entity there is.

    For good or ill, depending on your point of view, it would be more than able for even the most enthusiastic, reforming Health Minister you could imagine anywhere.

    And we have Dr. Reilly....

  10. #10
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Posts
    2,421
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by ShoutingIsLeadership View Post
    Why did you exclude this important point from your 'key point'?

    '....and subsidies for fruit and vegetables could lead to beneficial dietary changes and potentially improve health'.

    I think because they more or less conclude that any savings made on fruit & veg purchases would be spent on sweets...

Page 1 of 7 12345 ... LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •