Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 999tigger)
    Public health has always been an issue for government for hundreds of years.

    It picks up the tab becayse the cost of dealing with obesity is going to plunge the health service into crisis. It should pay for itself or people should accpet more tax rises.


    Why not just section the obese, lock them up until they're skinny. If you manage to get yourself to the point of obesity clearly there must be some underlying mental health issues, they're a danger to themselves, we already section and force treatment on people for less.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by She-Ra)
    Not all calories are born equal. A banana is full of calories that are nutritionally dense in comparison. A mars bar is not full of vital nutrients and minerals which the body needs.

    Food is fuel. A mars bar is ok for a treat every now and then. Although the sugar will convert to energy and "fuel" it won't nourish the body and feed our cells with vital nutrients.
    But as I said before, this is only a problem if you're micronutrient (and indeed fibre) deficient. Is that a big problem in this country? (Lack of fibre is I grant you.)
    • TSR Support Team
    • Very Important Poster
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Support Team
    Very Important Poster
    Welcome Squad
    I don't really have an issue with the sugar tax.

    I just find it pointless.

    (Original post by She-Ra)
    Not all calories are born equal. A banana is full of calories that are nutritionally dense in comparison. A mars bar is not full of vital nutrients and minerals which the body needs.

    Food is fuel. A mars bar is ok for a treat every now and then. Although the sugar will convert to energy and "fuel" it won't nourish the body and feed our cells with vital nutrients.
    But once your needs are met, there is no advantage really in having your calories saturated with nutrients.
    • TSR Group Staff
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Group Staff
    (Original post by chazwomaq)
    Could you be more specific in what way it's not the same?

    The important variable is satiety. Sugary foods tend not to be satiating so it's easy to eat too much of them. Fruits and vegetables are much more satiating. But eat too many calories from ANY source and you'll get fat.

    A big problem is that people like to view certain foods and healthy and others as unhealthy. This isn't useful*. It a whole diet and lifestyle that's healthy or not.

    *There are a few exceptions such as salt and trans fat.
    Food coloring's, artificial sweeteners, preservatives, saturated fats, carcinogens, arsenic - all of these are frequently found in processed foods and all of which are very bad for you.

    You are talking from a weight gain/weight loss angle - fad dieting. Snake oil sellers telling you that you can eat what you want as part of a 'balanced' diet and not put on fat.

    Again my point - who in the world ever got fat from eating a diet high in fruits and veggies? Where is the evidence of this? There is plenty of evidence of people on high fruit and veggie diets being lean and healthy. There are also millions of cases of ill health as a result of processed foods and fatty foods.

    The perception of 'diet' is so mislead in today's society and your points sadly reinforce this,
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    Sugar is inelastic thats why. If you taxed an elastic good then it might have an effect

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    • Very Important Poster
    Online

    19
    Very Important Poster
    (Original post by knapdarloch)
    Why not just section the obese, lock them up until they're skinny. If you manage to get yourself to the point of obesity clearly there must be some underlying mental health issues, they're a danger to themselves, we already section and force treatment on people for less.
    67% of men and 57% of women in the Uk are obese or overweight.

    24.9% of men are obese. That would mean sexcioning tens of millions of people (including students and children).

    We dont have the places. It would cost a lot of money. Services and the economy would collapse etc.

    Mental health issue? they eat too much and dont move enough.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kalclash)
    Food coloring's, artificial sweeteners, preservatives, saturated fats, carcinogens, arsenic - all of these are frequently found in processed foods and all of which are very bad for you.

    You are talking from a weight gain/weight loss angle - fad dieting. Snake oil sellers telling you that you can eat what you want as part of a 'balanced' diet and not put on fat.

    Again my point - who in the world ever got fat from eating a diet high in fruits and veggies? Where is the evidence of this? There is plenty of evidence of people on high fruit and veggie diets being lean and healthy. There are also millions of cases of ill health as a result of processed foods and fatty foods.

    The perception of 'diet' is so mislead in today's society and your points sadly reinforce this,

    Where is there clear evidence that the majority of artificial sweeteners in our food are very bad for us. Do link me the peer-reviewed studies that reach this conclusion. Aspartame, etc.

    What's wrong with low - moderate intake of saturated fat?

    Not all processed foods are equal. Inclusion of trans fats are bad, yes. Certain types of processing is bad, yes like removal of fibre/complex carbs. But not all can be tarnished with the same brush.
    Offline

    20
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by pjm600)
    Disproportionately affects the poor. Is a blunt instrument, no one would contest that tonic water is damaging peoples' health. Milk based drinks are exempt, so milkshakes escape. Targets only drinks, not fast food etc.

    Everybody outside politics knows that adding a tax is not effective in changing behavior, but it will just generate revenue from those who drink sugary drinks the most, who might happen not to be the political class. Adding 20p on to the price of a litre of coke will not stop people buying it. For various reasons, humans cannot be treated rational economic actors which this measure attempts to do.

    Aside from generating revenue, it will not work.
    They don't know this. There's a lot of evidence that increasing the price of something to the consumer reduces demand, especially for addictive products. That's why the industry resists these changes so much.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 999tigger)
    67% of men and 57% of women in the Uk are obese or overweight.

    24.9% of men are obese. That would mean sexcioning tens of millions of people (including students and children).

    We dont have the places. It would cost a lot of money. Services and the economy would collapse etc.
    Once you start sectioning people i'm sure those numbers will start falling dramatically, who wants to be locked up with a load of fruit cakes?

    (Original post by 999tigger)
    Mental health issue? they eat too much and dont move enough.
    Well yeah, they're incapable of controlling themselves, looking after themselves, they're self harming, they're a danger to themselves and potentially their children. We section anorexics why not the obese.
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by kalclash)
    Food coloring's, artificial sweeteners, preservatives, saturated fats, carcinogens, arsenic - all of these are frequently found in processed foods and all of which are very bad for you.
    Sounds like scare mongering to me. We have very high standards of food safety in the country. Medical opinion is shifting away from saturated fats being universally bad.

    You are talking from a weight gain/weight loss angle - fad dieting. Snake oil sellers telling you that you can eat what you want as part of a 'balanced' diet and not put on fat.
    The debate is about weight so that's logical. But I am using diet as in "what you eat" rather than as a fad / temporary thing.

    Again my point - who in the world ever got fat from eating a diet high in fruits and veggies? Where is the evidence of this? There is plenty of evidence of people on high fruit and veggie diets being lean and healthy.
    That's because they don't eat too many calories.

    There are also millions of cases of ill health as a result of processed foods and fatty foods.
    Illness is not generally the result of specific foods (salt is a notable exception), but the result of a bad diet in general (too many calories, not enough fibre, not enough unsaturated fats etc.) and other lifestyle factors.
    • Very Important Poster
    Online

    19
    Very Important Poster
    (Original post by knapdarloch)
    Once you start sectioning people i'm sure those numbers will start falling dramatically, who wants to be locked up with a load of fruit cakes?



    Well yeah, they're incapable of controlling themselves, looking after themselves, they're self harming, they're a danger to themselves and potentially their children. We section anorexics why not the obese.
    You arent gloing to section from 15-30 million people. Dont be silly.
    • TSR Group Staff
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    TSR Group Staff
    (Original post by MountKimbie)
    Where is there clear evidence that the majority of artificial sweeteners in our food are very bad for us. Do link me the peer-reviewed studies that reach this conclusion. Aspartame, etc

    What's wrong with low - moderate intake of saturated fat?

    Not all processed foods are equal. Inclusion of trans fats are bad, yes. Certain types of processing is bad, yes like removal of fibre/complex carbs. But not all can be tarnished with the same brush.
    There are plenty of studies for both pro's and con's of aspartame, you can do a quick Google search and make up your own mind. Just bear in mind that the sweetener industry is a multi-billion dollar industry, so it's pretty obvious who's funding the 'pro' research. This is where a bit of individuality helps out, don't follow the sheep.

    I never said there was anything wrong with saturated fat in low/moderate amounts - as long as it comes from a plant based, unprocessed source.

    Not all processed food are equal, this is obvious. However most people really struggle to identify the fact that a calorie is not just a calorie. Therefore understanding that not all processed foods are as bad as others would be a bit too much of a stretch for most people to understand. Sad, but true.
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by 999tigger)
    You arent gloing to section from 15-30 million people. Dont be silly.
    Course not, we section some and the others will be scared skinny.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DiddyDec)
    You are massively blowing it out of proportion.

    Do you do this speech when you are asked to pay for plastic bags?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    I don't pay for plastic bags - there's no enforcement mechanism. I mean, if there is a tesco/sainsburies employee literally standing right behind me, over my shoulder, I might pay for it. *might*. but other than that, nope.
    and I'm not talking about proportion, I'm talking about principle. if we have one rule in one matter, and it logically applies in another place, then proprtoionality is a meaningless concept. for instance - free speech has nothing to do with proportionality regarding how offensive something is (at least that's the actual form of free speech)
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by chazwomaq)
    I thought it was obesity that caused type II diabetes rather than sugar per se: https://www.diabetes.org.uk/Guide-to...uses-diabetes/
    Like most illnesses of the self, type 2 diabetes is complex and multifactorial, the aetiology of which, despite all the the research money sunk into it, is still not that well understood. There is no straight direct casual relationship, in the same way that there is no direct causal relationship between obesity and type 2 diabetes. It's not obesity per se that causes the illness, it's that way it buggers up your cellular regulation that puts you at risk (also you don't need to be overweight to get type 2 diabetes).

    However sugar has been implicated independently of merely causing people's waistlines to expand:

    These studies challenge the long-standing dogma that “a calorie is just a calorie” and suggest that the metabolic effects of food may matter as much as its energy content. The discovery that fructose-mediated generation of uric acid may have a causal role in diabetes and obesity provides new insights into pathogenesis and therapies for this important disease.
    http://diabetes.diabetesjournals.org.../10/3307.short

    Experimental studies provide insight into potential biological mechanisms and illustrate that intake of SSBs increases T2D and cardiovascular risk factors. SSBs promote weight gain by incomplete compensation of liquid calories and contribute to increased risk of T2D not only through weight gain, but also independently through glycemic effects of consuming large amounts of rapidly absorbable sugars and metabolic effects of fructose.
    http://link.springer.com/article/10....892-012-0259-6
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by democracyforum)
    Here's the problem.

    Margarine, sunflower oil, corn oil etc cause obesity and tooth decay.

    Not sugar.

    Phytic acid from grains causes tooth decay.

    We need to ban and tax sunflower oil and margarine.
    What about rape oil?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Quantex)
    ...
    Thanks for the info.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DiddyDec)
    What about rape oil?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    should be banned on the name alone

    but yes, it's toxic and bad for you,
    Offline

    21
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by DiddyDec)
    You are massively blowing it out of proportion.

    Do you do this speech when you are asked to pay for plastic bags?

    Posted from TSR Mobile
    The plastic bag charge is about protecting the environment for everyone.

    The sugar tax is about protecting adult citizens from their own decisions.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TimmonaPortella)
    The plastic bag charge is about protecting the environment for everyone.

    The sugar tax is about protecting adult citizens from their own decisions.
    And children from bad parenting.
 
 
 
Poll
Who is your favourite TV detective?
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.