Sugar tax
without getting political on this , is the sugar tax going to make a difference to children drinking coke etc or should it be left to the parents to decide what to allow
is education better than trying to out price a product?
Comments
-
Well, it's a step in the right direction, but continuing pressure on the food and drink industry to be more responsible is needed. Apparently the money from this tax will be ring-fenced for primary school sports and if that is really what happens it'll be
a win-win move!
0 -
The drinks manufacturers will either make drinks smaller but not lower price or put price up or both. It is just indirect taxation. Taxation of 18-24p, really? What a joke the whole sorry farrago is
0 -
I doubt that it will stop kids drinking so many bottles of pop......they seem to have a bottle permanently in their hand (do they have some strange, congenital thirst syndrome or something?). Whether it costs another 20p or not won't make any difference,
because mum or dad will just cough up the extra.But hopefully it might make the manufacturers put less sugar in the stuff, to avoid the tax.
Yes, parents do have a role to play - stop buying it!
0 -
Education hasn't worked.
This isn't aimed just at the consumer, it makes manufacturers pay so they will be looking at their formulas to avoid it.
I wish it included milk shakes and smoothies too. Both can contain more sugar than Coke and the health benefits are extremely dubious
0 -
It doesn't make any logical sense, the tax is supposed to go towards providing healthy activities for children. The manufacturers will reduce the sugar content and there will be no tax to boost healthy activities. Whether families or individuals will commit
themselves to reducing their sugar intake is the big hurdle that probably needs promoting.0 -
The sugar tax is a step in the right direction. The best way to ensure that kids dond drink or eat sugary products is to fine the parents for child neglect/abuse for allowing their children to consume the stuff.
Parental responsibility is at an all time low nowadays.
K
0 -
The sugar tax is a step in the right direction. The best way to ensure that kids dond drink or eat sugary products is to fine the parents for child neglect/abuse for allowing their children to consume the stuff.
Parental responsibility is at an all time low nowadays.
K
Thanks for the kind words K
0 -
If it means bumping up consumption of horrid chemical sweeteners it will be really bad news IMO. Give me a small amount of sugar any day.
I agree entirely Pippah. I am quite addicted to sugar, I guess. I can't drink a cup of tea without sugar but absolutely hate sweeteners in any form. If the only choice is a cuppa with sweetness or no sugar, then I would just go without the drink - every time!
David
0 -
OH has recently stopped putting sugar in drinks, it's surprising how nice tea and coffee tastes without it but it takes a bit of resolve to do it.
There's
so much hidden sugar not just in sweetened drinks but in ready meals like pies, pasties and curry etc and then there's alcohol. We're addicted to the stuff! (Biscuits are my downfall.)0 -
OH has recently stopped putting sugar in drinks, it's surprising how nice tea and coffee tastes without it but it takes a bit of resolve to do it.
There's
so much hidden sugar not just in sweetened drinks but in ready meals like pies, pasties and curry etc and then there's alcohol. We're addicted to the stuff! (Biscuits are my downfall.)And what about cereals?
0 -
I agree that I'd prefer a small amount of sugar to chemical sweeteners but we aren't talking about small amounts of sugar in these drinks. There's 7 teaspoons of sugar in 330ml of Coke, I can't dissolve that much sugar in plain water.
Smoothies have the same amount in 250ml. It's still sugar even if it comes from fruit.
Theres a Starbucks coffee on sale with the equivalent amount of sugar as two cans of Coke. 14 Teaspoons!!!!
There's added sugar in so many foods and then extra salt is added to balance the flavour. I don't want rising amounts of hidden sugar and any initiative to halt it is fine by me.
If they don't make it then we can't buy it
0 -
The purpose of taxing anything is to raise money - there is no other reason despite what politicians say. If something is bad for us the manufacturers should be told to make it healthier or they won't be allowed to sell it. Taxing sugary drinks like taxing
tobacco, alcohol and fuel will only deter the poorest, others will simply pay the money. Any reduction will be minimal. If taxing products really worked we'd all be none smoking teetotallers who walked everywhere - wouldn't we?0 -
Surely, if parents had a real interest in their kid's health, they wouldn't buy all these sugary products (or allow their children to buy them)......would they?
Do we have a parent on here who does allow these purchases? Could they explain why they don't care about their kid's health?
0 -
Sorry Ian - I can't help there. I never bought sugary drinks and my children don't buy them now. I don't have any friends who buy high sugar drinks either.
I don't think some people know just how much sugar is in these drinks. There's also a real fear of sweeteners I remember when I was a kid that Ribena was advertised as having 'health benefits' with all the vitamin C but it's one of the higher sugar content drinks around.
Marketing, advertising, poor understanding of food labelling, misplaced belief in the fact that fruit sugars somehow don't count all have a part to play. I also think that the emphasis on fat in the diet has let high sugar slide through unheeded. How many people say 'full fat Coke'?
Look who has sponsored some of the recent dietary research too.
Sugar isn't evil but many people eat far too much without realising it and something needs to be done.
0 -
we all need to balance 'fuel in' against 'fuel burned'...
some with hard manual jobs (or those that take plenty of exercise) burn plenty of calories, so need a healthy intake of energy...
however, there are very many who lead sedentary lifestyles, using the car for the shortest of trips, with some almost never using their own steam...
once folk get 'out of the habit' of walking or cycling when taking a short trip (morning paper, pint of milk etc), then not reducing fuel intake to compensate for the lower level of energy used will only result in one thing....larger clothes
if kids still played as much sport as past generations and walked to school instead of being dropped off by car, then perhaps fewer would require the 'help' being 'budgetted' for...
0 -
On the question of excercise.......I've noticed that a large, luxury coach now picks up kids each morning, on the road near to us. It appears to be hired by a school.
The bus stops are about half a mile apart. I had wondered why there were about 4 or 5 cars (all newish, mostly 4x4) parked at the side of the road together. Now I realise that they are parents taking their kids to the bus stop.
Worse is, they park up, waiting for the posh coach to arrive, so that their little cherubs don't have to stand outside in that awful fresh air, waiting a few minutes for the bus to come.
Unbelievable!
0 -
I agree that I'd prefer a small amount of sugar to chemical sweeteners but we aren't talking about small amounts of sugar in these drinks. There's 7 teaspoons of sugar in 330ml of Coke, I can't dissolve that much sugar in plain water.
Smoothies have the same amount in 250ml. It's still sugar even if it comes from fruit.
Theres a Starbucks coffee on sale with the equivalent amount of sugar as two cans of Coke. 14 Teaspoons!!!!
There's added sugar in so many foods and then extra salt is added to balance the flavour. I don't want rising amounts of hidden sugar and any initiative to halt it is fine by me.
If they don't make it then we can't buy it
Could not agree more
0 -
One thing is certain, we can't afford people expecting the NHS to insulate/repair the consequences of lifestyle without a substantial rise in taxes.
0 -
That's what huskies do anyway. You'll have to come up with something a bit more challenging.
0 -
I do not think for one minute that this will help .
For example Cigs ( i dont smoke ) they have gone up and up an still people smoke , and the government are laughing at you that do .
So the People and Kids who Drink Cola etc yes its bad for you in the long term but its a combination of issues.
We all go to the Supermarket ( well most of us do) we have a choice what we put in the trolley. Everything in Moderation, but for Obesitey yes its a problem here in the uk, but so is Drugs Alcoholism gambling. etc. As a parent and grandparent how times have changed the kids have more choice they have more say than when my own two were little. And they certainly have more money to spend .
0 -
People will still buy and drink full sugar drinks but because the manufacturers are hit rather than just the consumer there's a reasonable expectation that they will reformulate the products to get below the point where they have to pay up
0
, best go for a run....
