Sugar tax

[Dr Jekyll]

Halb said:

https://chocolateclass.wordpress.com/2017/03/10/hi...


http://www.divineeatingout.com/food-1/sugar-consum...
https://www.channel4.com/news/how-sweet-is-our-lov...

Sugar intake is up because it's in everything, unlike, pre-70s.

I was a bit suspicious as to why that graph shows a levelling out in the 1960s, then switched to a darker shaded line to show a steep rise.

It looks remarkably like this graph

[url]|https://thumbsnap.com/FQThrwEG[/url

Which switches from showing UK figures to US figures in order to show an increase.

Incidentally DEFRA figures show UK calories consumption per head declining from 2,500 per day in 1974 to 2,000 in 2012. It's exercise that's behind the weight gain, not increasing consumption of sugar or anything else.

Edited by Dr Jekyll on Sunday 27th May 07:30

[zygalski]

But if we as a nation are eating more processed foods, takeaways, sugary drinks & cereals where a larger and larger proportion of calories come from added sugar....
Couple that with more sedentary lifestyles, and you get the obesity/T2 diabetes epidemic that we've got today.
At least we're #1 at something in Europe I suppose, even if it's being fat fkers.

Please tell us how a reduction in over all sugar consumption is bad for health.
I think the medical profession would also be interested to hear.

[Dr Jekyll]

zygalski said:

But if we as a nation are eating more processed foods, takeaways, sugary drinks & cereals where a larger and larger proportion of calories come from added sugar....
Couple that with more sedentary lifestyles, and you get the obesity/T2 diabetes epidemic that we've got today.
At least we're #1 at something in Europe I suppose, even if it's being fat fkers.

Please tell us how a reduction in over all sugar consumption is bad for health.
I think the medical profession would also be interested to hear.

I have never claimed that a reduction is bad for health. The question is whether a sugar tax is worthwhile. Even if you accept that it would reduce obesity in the UK despite not doing so anywhere else it's been tried, there is still the personal choice argument.

[zygalski]

Dr Jekyll said:

zygalski said:

But if we as a nation are eating more processed foods, takeaways, sugary drinks & cereals where a larger and larger proportion of calories come from added sugar....
Couple that with more sedentary lifestyles, and you get the obesity/T2 diabetes epidemic that we've got today.
At least we're #1 at something in Europe I suppose, even if it's being fat fkers.

Please tell us how a reduction in over all sugar consumption is bad for health.
I think the medical profession would also be interested to hear.

I have never claimed that a reduction is bad for health. The question is whether a sugar tax is worthwhile. Even if you accept that it would reduce obesity in the UK despite not doing so anywhere else it's been tried, there is still the personal choice argument.

I think in certain situations you have to forget about freedom of choice.
For instance, offer kids pizza & chips every day on their school menu & guess what?

Admittedly, in the schools that have adopted healthy eating menus, you can get fat parents passing burgers to fat kids at the school gates though.

Unfortunately parents & kids can no longer be trusted to make the correct decisions without financial persuasion.
If someone wants to pay through the nose to drink 75% their daily recommended sugar intake in one can of Coke, then that's their choice, isn't it?

[grumbledoak]

Halb said:

Sugar intake is up because it's in everything, unlike, pre-70s.

Sugar is used as a filler in all sorts of unexpected "foods". If the sugar tax deters this practice that would be a positive; taking sugar out of things that obviously contain sugar, like Irn Bru, is a dumb move. Sadly we can probably guess what effects will prevail.

For our actual obesity causes I would be looking more at these sort of graphs:

[S. Gonzales Esq.]

zygalski said:

I think in certain situations you have to forget about freedom of choice.

Exactly - individual choice must be sacrificed for the greater good. If people think they can make decisions for themselves, they need to be re-educated to respect the decisions of those in power. Our leaders have all the information, and know what is best for us.

zygalski said:

If someone wants to pay through the nose to drink 75% their daily recommended sugar intake in one can of Coke, then that's their choice, isn't it?

And if the tax has the effect of removing all high-sugar products from the market because the manufacturers think people would rather a drink tastes like st than pay a few pence more, then that's surely a good thing.

People who formerly enjoyed these things in moderation should be glad to give them up. Their lost small pleasures are insignificant - who on earth thinks it's the government's job to enable people to live the life they choose?

[Dr Jekyll]

zygalski said:

I think in certain situations you have to forget about freedom of choice.
For instance, offer kids pizza & chips every day on their school menu & guess what?

Admittedly, in the schools that have adopted healthy eating menus, you can get fat parents passing burgers to fat kids at the school gates though.

Unfortunately parents & kids can no longer be trusted to make the correct decisions without financial persuasion.
If someone wants to pay through the nose to drink 75% their daily recommended sugar intake in one can of Coke, then that's their choice, isn't it?

Restricting freedom of choice for children is one thing. Restricting it for adults is quite another. Why is a 'parent' any less qualified to make the decision that a politician, who may also be a parent? Whether I choose to quench my thirst with a can of Coke or a glass of water is nobody's business but mine.

[55palfers]

How many fat kids drink Schweppes tonic I wonder. Noticed it's gone up a fair bit.

[Halb]

zygalski said:

But if we as a nation are eating more processed foods, takeaways, sugary drinks & cereals where a larger and larger proportion of calories come from added sugar....
Couple that with more sedentary lifestyles, and you get the obesity/T2 diabetes epidemic that we've got today.
At least we're #1 at something in Europe I suppose, even if it's being fat fkers.

Please tell us how a reduction in over all sugar consumption is bad for health.
I think the medical profession would also be interested to hear.

Exactly, and that's where the increase in sugar comes from. Adding sugar to ta may be down, but overall it's up, the standard western diet is full of hidden sugars. Take a look at any tinned or packaged food and you'll see sugar in the ingredients. You'll even see dextrose added to frozen meat, that's crazy.

this is a great vid, but long, that discusses hormones versus calories, for those interested

Leptin & Insulin Resistance Balancing Tips w/ Jason Fung, MD

https://youtu.be/jXXGxoNFag4
95 mins

Edited by Halb on Sunday 27th May 10:35

[Dr Jekyll]

Halb said:

Exactly, and that's where the increae in suagr comes from. Adding suagr to ta may be down, but overall it's up, the standard western diet is full of hidden suagrs. Take a look at any tinned or packaged food and you'll see sugar in the ingredients. You'll even see dextrose added to frozen meat, that's crazy.

It's added in tiny quantities to counteract the saltiness, not as part of a plot against the nations health.

[zygalski]

Tate & Lyle sponsor Tory conference
https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/4599678/anger-after-...

That Sugar Film
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=6uaWekLrilY

[Halb]

THere was a great BBC doc called, the Men who Made us Fat, it went into the food culture change in the UK, and wasn't just centred on the food itself, although all of this is organic and connected and these different reasons don;t exist in a vacuum.

[voyds9]

Two things are becoming evident from this debate

1) Schools have failed to educate the now parents on nutrition

2) for years we have been told to monitor calorific intake and now some calories appear to be more of a problem than others.

And don't forget that the health care professionals who are trying to educate us have higher than average rates of obesity, alcoholism and suicide than the general public.

[grantone]

Dr Jekyll said:

Restricting freedom of choice for children is one thing. Restricting it for adults is quite another. Why is a 'parent' any less qualified to make the decision that a politician, who may also be a parent? Whether I choose to quench my thirst with a can of Coke or a glass of water is nobody's business but mine.

I agree to a point, but we do have socialised healthcare where the impact of individual choices can result in costs for everyone. I think we sort of have a responsibility to keep ourselves healthy to keep avoidable healthcare and related costs down. It's a grey area though and I don't know how much coercion I agree with.

[Hoofy]

Well, I thought childhood obesity had been killed dead in April.

https://news.sky.com/story/proposed-ban-on-selling...

Maybe we should ban children instead.

[otolith]

grantone said:

I agree to a point, but we do have socialised healthcare where the impact of individual choices can result in costs for everyone. I think we sort of have a responsibility to keep ourselves healthy to keep avoidable healthcare and related costs down. It's a grey area though and I don't know how much coercion I agree with.

I think once the needs of the NHS start dictating how we live, the tail is wagging the dog.

[grumbledoak]

Various health organisations, from the WHO to the US Dept. of Health to the NHS, have been telling us what to eat for decades. The result of people largely following this advice, in the US, is obesity at 47% for some groups and chronic illness affecting 78% of the over 55s.

The advice is wrong.

[chris watton]

grumbledoak said:

Various health organisations, from the WHO to the US Dept. of Health to the NHS, have been telling us what to eat for decades. The result of people largely following this advice, in the US, is obesity at 47% for some groups and chronic illness affecting 78% of the over 55s.

The advice is wrong.

Yep, all it comes down to was that the sugar lobby had better funding and greased more palms than the fat lobby. After this, fat, even good, essential fats, were demonised and sugar wasn't, and here we are.

[Halb]

being a breatharian is the way to go

[Wobbegong]

chris watton said:

grumbledoak said:

Various health organisations, from the WHO to the US Dept. of Health to the NHS, have been telling us what to eat for decades. The result of people largely following this advice, in the US, is obesity at 47% for some groups and chronic illness affecting 78% of the over 55s.

The advice is wrong.

Yep, all it comes down to was that the sugar lobby had better funding and greased more palms than the fat lobby. After this, fat, even good, essential fats, were demonised and sugar wasn't, and here we are.

When at school in the 80s / 90s the teachings were that fat makes you fat (based on research). Unfortunately, research sometimes seems to have an answer before the research even starts, depending on who funds it.