Tax on fizzy drinks and curb on takeaway outlets to fight obesity: good idea or not?

It's a ridiculous idea. How long have we been fed the line that 'diet' foods are the way to lose weight and have a healthy diet? All we've ended up with are a load of frankenstein foods full of god knows what. Margarine, low fat, low sugar, anything that has a list of ingredients that looks like it would be more at home on a shampoo bottle or in a lab than in your body. We're told to eat pasta, baked potatoes, drink fruit juice. But actually, in my own experience, I had to go very low carb to lose the weight I'd stacked on through an unhealthy diet and in pregnancy. It's very easy to say 'ooooh but I eat so well, I cook everything from scratch'. If you eat too much, you will become overweight. For me, low carb works. So no sugar, but plenty of good fats. Real butter, cream. No fruit juice or yoghurts packed with sweetner. But that's ME. Who decides what's healthy and what's not? And councils can't town plan for a fig anyway. What of convenience shops close to schools? There's one at the end of our road that is packed every day after the primary school kicks out, full of children buying sweets. There are 2 aisles of sweets in a small corner shop. There's 2 tiny shelves of wilting veg. But I wouldn't want it closed. The economy is bad enough without shops having to shut because they're too close to a school for goodness sake. Personal responsibility is what is going to stop an obesity epidemic. But like far too much nowadays, people are complacent. People have normailsed their size as they're surrounded by people of a similar size. It makes me despair when I see how many of my 8 and 4 yo's classmates are already seriously overweight, and for their sakes I wish there was a simple answer. If a child was seriously underweight I think people would be more quick to refer them for help and to expect the parents to do something. But it's almost become a question of ettiquette as well- it's considered very rude to suggest someone is overweight.

merrymouse, they do that on ALL food products and it drives me nuts. You have to be really on the ball when reading the labels.

But thats the other half of the issue, people are eating too much and everyone thinks a 'serving' is actually a lot bigger than it is in reality. So when you have an understanding of portion sizes that is wrong, then it doesn't really matter whether they are eating home cooked or processed food. Your perception is still wrong. Why is it that one of the best diets out there is supposed to be the 9" plate diet?! (But who makes money from this diet? Not the food manufacturers... Not the magazines who can sell you the next latest diet fad in a few months time.)

As for doctors knowing what they are talking about; I don't buy into giving doctors infallibility status I'm afraid. See BigPharma for a few examples.

And no Polka, there doesn't seem to be ANYTHING in the proposals about diet drinks. Sugary drinks are an easy target because it panders to the public's limited understanding of the problem. That in itself is an issue. The public doesn't understand what's killing them and even the word 'diet' is suggestive. As are labels like sugar free, or fat free if people don't properly understand what they put in their food instead and that there is no such thing as a 'bad' food only too much of it. Because these are the messages we have been sold and bought into, time and time again.

So for doctors, of all people, to be actually ENDORSING this way of thinking and are COMPLICIT with it; I get really angry about it all.

All of these things are something that can be sold as 'being good for us' with a lot more ease. And the likes of Coca Cola, won't put up too much of a fight on this one because they will welcome a change like this more than they will like education!

Its all just more advertising and propaganda. Rather than trying to actually solve the problems.

what i meant was today its fizzy drinks but next it could be all food getting VAT added, because this government will do anything to get more money off us.

But obesity is costing the NHS millions and draining resources.

I loath white bread but not sure it is as damaging and pointless as sugary drinks.Maybe biscuits and chips over a certain calorie and fat content should be taxed more-we'd eat less of them that's for sure.Since food prices have gone up I've stopped buying all sorts if things we can't afford.

Drinks are a great place to start as they serve zero purpose.

This does worry me as well. It seems to me there are actually very few foods and/or nutrients whose precise impact on national obesity is understood. Sugar is such an obviously unnecessary substance that I don't really care what they do with fizzy drinks but I'd argue strongly against taxes on (say) butter and cheese.

its fizzy drinks today but what about in a few years time they decide we are eating too much white bread, tax that and make us all eat brown, how about biscuits, tax them too, all cakes, potatoes, some people are making chips lets tax them too. Something needs to be done but not more taxes .

Red. I agree they need to tackle diet crap too,maybe they're planning to?Also I suspect education would come too.

If a tax only goes to giving the NHS more money it would be a start.

Whilst they are at it could they do something about the labelling on fizzy drinks?

Bottles of Fanta, clearly designed to be drank at a sitting are labelled as x amount of calories 'per serving', the serving being half a bottle.

If you want a better method of trying to solve the problem, you'd be better to stop the sale of small bottles of anything but water.

People don't want to lug huge bottles around all the time.

Well it's there and I can't be arsed to link.

'twas highly reported only recently,sugar as an addiction has also been known about for years.

Interestingly my uncle is an obesity/diabetes medical scientist in North America,he's been saying for years that America's sugar and hfcs addiction will eventually bring their whole health system(such as it is)down.

I suspect doctors in this country know what they're talking about and we simply can't carry on like this.

taxing smoking doesn't stop people smoking

stopping smoking in public places has reduced people smoking and encouraged them to give up.

Yeah, but have you TRIED to give up the sugary taste?

They are addicted to the taste, and will try and find other ways to get that 'hit' rather than switch to water. Hence the switch to 'diet' drinks.

You yourself said "sugar is as addictive as crack" so if thats the case, do you really think this is the solution?

You need to educate people to get unhooked to ALL sugary tastes, if you want to tackle obesity. Otherwise you have to tax ALL drinks that not only have sugar in them, but also ones with sugar substitutes.

Thats the point. The solution they are proposing doesn't actually solve the problem here if diet drinks are also a cause.

BTW, if anyone is interested and thinks there may be something more sinister in all this, look at the price of sugar compared to various sugar substitutes. Then look at who owns the patents to this sugar substitutes. Hello Coca Cola (amongst others). There is actually more profit to be made in diet drinks than sugary ones...

But you don't have to drink fizzy drinks or eat junk.

And yes, if they do this, will the government not accept their sponsorship? Or how about tax companies that do accept their sponsorship?

Who sponsors FA Cup? Wimbledon? Most of the reality TV shows?

The apple farmers? I doubt it.

Polka Why should I? You made a statement, back it up.

Nobody has to drink soft drinks,that is the point.They serve absolutely no purpose.Tax them until they're unaffordable for everybody as far as I'm concerned.They are simply sugar,water and shite which make companies millions.We all have taps with clean water.

Will never happen - Scottish Government fighting in court to get minimum pricing on alcohol to save thousands of lives and you can bet that the likes of Coca Cola, McDs etc will do exactly the same thing to stop this tax

Bloody fabulous idea though and would totally support it - apart from taxing Irn Bru! it's the juice of the gods :)

The difference between putting up the price on drinks compared with cigarettes.

You HAVE to eat. You do not HAVE to smoke.

Therefore whatever you cut out of your diet, you need to replace somehow.

Therefore the ONLY way to solve problems about diet is to educate people properly.

You can have changes like this until you are blue in the face, but it will only cause new problems unless you actually tackle the root causes.

And as I said upthread, if 'diet' drinks are in fact WORSE than sugary drinks which seems to be the case, then what the fuck is this actually going to solve? And people will just switch to diet drinks unless they have education to do differently.

But polkadot adding extra tax is not going to stop peoples' addiction to sugar. If people can afford regular take-aways then they cannot be poor - so charging them a bit extra will not stop them.
Likewise, if they have a taste for fizzy sugary drinks, they are not going to suddenly get a taste for drinking water. Taxing these items is not going to change everyone's taste buds - that takes will power. I can remember giving up the 2 spoons of sugar that I used to take in coffee, it took weeks of determination and pulling faces at the bitter taste - but I got there in the end.

Tee Google it.

gov was very happy to accept coca cola sponsoring the olympics...

yes make it expensive

i dont think eating healthy is expensive - potatoes, lentils, seasonal apples, tinned tomatoes, bananas etc - bag of each of those costs less than a bottle of coke

Jelly. I think they should all be treated the same,don't care how pretty the packaging is.In fact these are the companies we should be focusing on particularly,far too often you think ah a pretty Eco type bottle must be better for me-if it is still full of sugar it isn't.

Sugar is as addictive as crack? Proof?

Big won't cure your family but it will help millions of others.

The fact is sugar is as addictive as crack,it is killing people and costing the NHS millions. I'm not a drug addict but fighting drug addiction is good for me too and children born into families with drug addicts.

I agree with these ideas, but my only problem with this idea is who exactly decides which drinks should be taxed?
There are some sparkling drinks we buy occasionally that contain no added sugar, yet they could still be classed as 'soft drinks' - Bottle green sparkling juices, Curiosity Cola and Purdeys are the main ones that spring to my mind... They are already expensive in comparison to your bog standard Colas etc, because they are ethically produced and don't contain crap.
I think it is a possibility that these smaller independent companies may get into trouble should there products be forced to go up in price.

My DS's school doesn't allow pupils out at any breaktimes, as many schools don't, so the fast food outlet idea would be void at many schools. I know his school (and many others) serves crappy meals still, so that problem still hasn't been solved despite Jamie Olivers best attempts.

I think its sad how parents are happy to take less and less responsibility for their childrens health and happiness,its lazy and pathetic.

My brother and sister-in-law are both very overweight. They do not eat take-aways or drink coke - they live on a diet of home cooked food, but obviously just eat too much of it. I have friends who are the same. So how exactly will putting the price of fizzy drinks up by 20% cure their obesity problems?