Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
x Turn on thread page Beta

Sugar tax and offers ban 'would work' says report watch

Announcements
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    Think this tax should be implemented even though i love sugary things should help.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    Anything to get their vaults filling.
    Offline

    14
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Asklepios)
    Sugar tax is a bad idea, because companies will just pass the cost onto consumers.
    "Sugar tax is a bad idea, because it's going to do what the intention of the tax is."
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    40g (10 teaspoons) of sugar in one Sainsbury's ultimate chocolate muffin is just unreal. And stuff like this is sitting on shelves ready for purchase.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mr Flak Jacket)
    40g (10 teaspoons) of sugar in one Sainsbury's ultimate chocolate muffin is just unreal. And stuff like this is sitting on shelves ready for purchase.
    It simply doesn't need to be so high and if it has to be we have to ask ourselves should it really be sold when it is so many times over the RDA


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mr Flak Jacket)
    40g (10 teaspoons) of sugar in one Sainsbury's ultimate chocolate muffin is just unreal. And stuff like this is sitting on shelves ready for purchase.
    I've heard the idea of teaspoon labelling being introduced for sugar, as well as the usual grams.

    Some people look at the label, see so many grams of sugar but have no idea how much that is. Teaspoon labelling might help them visualise it better and make people realise how high (or low) the sugar content is.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    I think I could agree to this tax, even though i have disagreed with it at the start of the thread, if the tax money went directly to giving extra funding to more swimming pools or a subsidy on bicycles.
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    I don't want a sugar tax. The Gov. might veil it as something to reduce diabetes etc. but if people are addicted would a tax stop them? The real reason for this is the Government to take more money, with a side argument of making people less fat.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by RFowler)
    I've heard the idea of teaspoon labelling being introduced for sugar, as well as the usual grams.Some people look at the label, see so many grams of sugar but have no idea how much that is. Teaspoon labelling might help them visualise it better and make people realise how high (or low) the sugar content is.
    I think teaspoon labelling would definitely make things easier to understand, but the cynic in me says people will still buy the product regardless. The best solution would be to not have products like 2 muffins for £1.50 with a total of 20 teaspoons of sugar on shelves in the first place. It's essentially poison disguised as a baked treat.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by She-Ra)
    I support the introduction of sugar tax, I also think there is a benefit to limiting BOGOF if it relates to sugary treats and not food which benefits our body.

    I think putting prices up isn't going to change anyone's habits, people will find a way to pay. There needs to be a focus on educating people and helping them to comprehend and understand how eating affects their emotional and physical health as well as their energy levels.

    To be honest, we need to change our whole culture when it comes to eating in this country.....
    Couldn't agree more. I don't think a 20% tax rate, or whatever the rate may be, would offer a huge deterrent: It may make people think twice about buying in excess, say when a can of coke becomes 72-80p about buying two, especially when there is also an offer on. But when it comes to actually consuming sugary food, I don't think the tax rate will affect people's decisions. What would be a positive starting point is through, like you say, educating people on health and exposing a little how much these preventive diseases, obsesity, diabetes etc etc. have an impact on our health system.
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Amy. J S)
    Couldn't agree more. I don't think a 20% tax rate, or whatever the rate may be, would offer a huge deterrent: It may make people think twice about buying in excess, say when a can of coke becomes 72-80p about buying two, especially when there is also an offer on. But when it comes to actually consuming sugary food, I don't think the tax rate will affect people's decisions. What would be a positive starting point is through, like you say, educating people on health and exposing a little how much these preventive diseases, obsesity, diabetes etc etc. have an impact on our health system.
    I suppose one thing it would do, is encourage companies to make yummy non-sugary things which will be cheaper than the sugary ones. Eventually, that would lead to a big change in the buying habits of people.
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Mr Flak Jacket)
    I think teaspoon labelling would definitely make things easier to understand, but the cynic in me says people will still buy the product regardless. The best solution would be to not have products like 2 muffins for £1.50 with a total of 20 teaspoons of sugar on shelves in the first place. It's essentially poison disguised as a baked treat.
    Exactly people don't have the time or inclination to read all the labels on food and they don't have the knowledge to know what is an appropriate amount.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Captain Jack)
    I suppose one thing it would do, is encourage companies to make yummy non-sugary things which will be cheaper than the sugary ones. Eventually, that would lead to a big change in the buying habits of people.
    Well this is the thing. Would this sugar-tax include artificial sweeteners as well ? Somebody else has mentioned this on this thread already, I think. I'm not sure that would be the case though, as artificial sweeteners are dirt-cheap to make, so govt. couldn't really justify a tax on something that already can be made so cheaply - despite the tax being for health benefits. Artificial sweeteners, it could be argued are worse when consumed in excess. Yes, cane sugar in excess leads to an excess of calories and eventually to obesity /diabetes, but we aren't actually aware of the effects of artificial sweeteners, leaving a huge question on their chemical compounds and effects on behaviour/body etc. I don't know, myself: There would have to be a lot debate and adequate legislation around this, I think.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    im indifferent to it (as i dont take sugar and dont eat many sweets so it wont really affect me as i live in a different country). But i can see both sides
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Amy. J S)
    Well this is the thing. Would this sugar-tax include artificial sweeteners as well ? Somebody else has mentioned this on this thread already, I think. I'm not sure that would be the case though, as artificial sweeteners are dirt-cheap to make, so govt. couldn't really justify a tax on something that already can be made so cheaply - despite the tax being for health benefits. Artificial sweeteners, it could be argued are worse when consumed in excess. Yes, cane sugar in excess leads to an excess of calories and eventually to obesity /diabetes, but we aren't actually aware of the effects of artificial sweeteners, leaving a huge question on their chemical compounds and effects on behaviour/body etc. I don't know, myself: There would have to be a lot debate and adequate legislation around this, I think.
    Artifical sweetners are not worse unless you consuming bottles of Canderel at a time.

    That is just BS by health food lobby that deliberately misrepresents studies on the subject.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    Artifical sweetners are not worse unless you consuming bottles of Canderel at a time.

    That is just BS by health food lobby that deliberately misrepresents studies on the subject.
    I'm not one of these health worriers that are frightened of the word "chemical".
    I was just claiming that the effects of artificial sweetners, in excess, are pretty unknown; there hasn't been much research on it, but then why would there be?
    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Amy. J S)
    I'm not one of these health worriers that are frightened of the word "chemical".
    I was just claiming that the effects of artificial sweetners, in excess, are pretty unknown; there hasn't been much research on it, but then why would there be?
    Well, there have been quite a few studies into Aspartame. The FDA wouldn't approve it otherwise.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DorianGrayism)
    Well, there have been quite a few studies into Aspartame. The FDA wouldn't approve it otherwise.
    Yeah, I had a good look around after your first comment. There has been a few significant and recent studies in artificial sweeteners. I shan't say any more though, I don't want to be ignorant.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by paul514)
    Exactly people don't have the time or inclination to read all the labels on food and they don't have the knowledge to know what is an appropriate amount.


    Posted from TSR Mobile
    And that's part of the reason why I don't think teaspoon labelling will make a significant difference - people don't care. Most will still pick up an item even that says "contains 10 teaspoons of sugar" if it means pacifying a child or satisfying their appetite.
    The best way to tackle problem would be to not have products with high sugar content on store shelves in the first place - i.e. reduce the amount of sugar available by producing products with less sugar.

    Leaving it up to people to decide won't solve anything.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Jeez, Is anything in this country not taxed or looking to be taxed?
 
 
 
Poll
Do I go to The Streets tomorrow night?
Useful resources

The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

Write a reply...
Reply
Hide
Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.