Can The Sugar Tax Really Cut Down Obesity Levels ?

One of the leading food issues for a few years now has been the link between obesity and the quantity of sugar consumed, especially in soft drinks and beverages. One of the implications of being overweight is the increased risk of developing type-2 diabetes. The story has already developed into one similar to the role tobacco and smoking has had on cancer going back decades and likewise with alcohol generally. Sugar consumption and being overweight looks set to have the same political and economic impact as these two especially as a tax on sugar appears increasingly likely. The United Kingdom and the USA are considering such action in the wake of an ever increasing level of obesity in the population.

Quite recently, the Lancet published a study which has already courted controversy for the statements it has made. The study quite specifically stated that reducing the sugar content of beverages could prevent 1.5 million cases of obesity and being overweight. These findings have already been challenged by the beverage industry. The Lancet study estimated that a 40% reduction in added sugar to what are called sugar-sweetened drinks would produce an average reduction of 38 kcal per day if pursued over 5 years.

The consequence of a reduction in the ingestion of ‘energy’ should lead to a reduction in body weight of 1.2 kg in adults which would then produce a reduction in those of us who are overweight and obese by approximately 1 million and ½ million respectively. The consequence is to prevent type-2 diabetes by 270 to 310 thousand cases over two decades. There is also likely to be a concomitant reduction in heart disease and cancer related illnesses. It is also likely that the one demographic group likely to be most impacted are the poor and children generally.

Taxation would certainly produce revenue but whether it would actually reduce consumption remains to be tested. The use of ‘sin taxes’ has been a common approach by governments to managing health conditions which are related to retail goods such as cigarettes. Imposing such a tax always discourages purchase except those who suffer cravings for a particular type of product.

The National Obesity Forum believes that a 50% tax rate is needed whereas the government had set a target tax level of 25%. The basis for this is that a sufficiently high deterrent is required rather than one that reduces consumption slightly or moderately. Ideally, those groups opposed to consumption would have it taxed out of existence whereas a government revenue service would like to see a regular and periodic tax stream. After all, sugar laded drinks are still a source of nutrition whatever the context.

It is worth examining the situation of sugar or soda taxes in other countries and whether they are achieving the desired effects of reducing consumption and indeed obesity. Mexico has one of the highest soda taxes and this is claimed to be working. The soda tax was imposed last year and there has already been a 12 % drop in the purchase and presumably consumption of sugar-based drinks.

Drinks are not the only provider of sugar. Numerous other products including ready meals, desserts, cereals etc. contain sugar and it is generally accepted that in the western world, portion sizes are too large and there is a greater deal of consumption than is really needed. In the Mexican situation, it is too early to see whether there is a correlation between the tax and a decline in overall obesity or weight. It would not be fair to comment yet on whether there would be a direct correlation.