LONDON - The battle to contain the global obesity crisis stepped up a gear yesterday as American public health experts demanded a sugar tax on the country's most popular source of refreshment - sweetened carbonated drinks and fruit juices.
In what is certain to become a worldwide debate on the
use of economic sanctions to tackle obesity, a group led by academics from Yale and Harvard universities proposed a "cola war", with a 1 cent tax per fluid ounce on sweetened beverages, raising the price of the average can of cola by 15 to 20 per cent.
They say this would cut calorie consumption from drinks by a minimum of 10 per cent (enough to prompt weight loss) and contribute almost US$15 billion ($21 billion) towards the health costs of obesity.
"The reasons to proceed are compelling. The science base linking the consumption of sugar-sweetened beverages to the risk of chronic disease is clear. Research suggests a tax ... would have strong positive effects on reducing consumption. We believe that taxes on beverages that help drive the obesity epidemic should and will become routine," the experts say in the New England Journal of Medicine.
British nutrition specialists backed the move but said other economic measures, such as a tariff on sugar imports, could be less politically controversial. Tam Fry, spokesman for the UK National Obesity Forum, said: "We have got to start thinking very seriously about taxing unhealthy food and drink as part of the drive to improve the nation's health and cut obesity."
Global consumption of fizzy drinks, fruit juices, smoothies and other sweetened beverages is soaring and is recognised as a major contributor to the obesity epidemic, especially among children.
ATTEMPTS TO REIN IN JUNK
A report by the respected Institute of Medicine in the US this month called for an increase in local taxes on soft drinks and junk food.
The British Medical Association narrowly defeated a chocolate tax proposal at its annual meeting in 2008.
Gordon Brown vetoed a plan for a tax on burgers and sweets in 2004, when Chancellor of the Exchequer, on the grounds that it would disproportionately affect the poor.
- INDEPENDENT
