CityCyclingEdinburgh Forum » Debate!
"All chocolate and junk food ‘should be slapped with 20% fat tax’ "
(26 posts)-
Posted 13 years ago #
-
Shouldn't that be a miminum price for a unit of fat?
It would be unfair to punish responsible fat consumers to address the needs of problem eaters.
Oh, sorry. That's alcohol.....
Would be interesting to know whether energy bars, sports drinks and of course cake fit on the unhealthy food spectrum.
Posted 13 years ago # -
"Michael Kelly: Time to take on the big boys and fight obesity"
Posted 13 years ago # -
Wonder if some sort of dose-controlled-drug-style system such as maximal package-size or single-purchase-quantity would work for chocolate or pies? R/A/G labelling might be of benefit on foods which people perceive as not obviously unhealthy (salt and butter disguised as ready meals etc.) but a bar of chocolate is a bar of chocolate. Foods have had their nutritional/calorific content displayed on them (often discreetly, around the back) for years but it's not stopping people from over-indulging; if half (of all faces of) the packaging was given over to a large-type percentage-of-daily-energy-requirements graphic (along the lines of CIGARETTES MAKE DEAD, but perhaps tailored to the particular greatest risk of the particular foodstuff) would it be any more effective? Like the cycle-infrastructure-paint-only-works-if-drivers-obey-it thing, food packaging warnings can only be fully effective when the import of the warnings are understood/heeded by the consumer. Portion sizes have a lot to answer for, as it's very easy even for health-aware people to massively over-indulge just by filling a bowl or covering a plate, particularly with something like breakfast cereal based on the tiny 'recommended serving' of 30g.
Posted 13 years ago # -
" Foods have had their nutritional/calorific content displayed on them (often discreetly, around the back) for years but it's not stopping people from over-indulging;"
I think that the calorific content is often very confusing. Often it is given per 100g so you have to try and calculate from that how many calories you have actually eaten. Or they are per "serving" but are unclear as to what a serving actually is. For ages I thought that a Galaxy Caramel was only 118 calories but if you look closely enough you will find that "one" does not equal one bar of Galaxy Caramel but half a bar as they come cut into two sticks.
I think it is very much time this was cleared up properly so that you do not need to be good at sums or very persistent to be able to work out how much you are eating.
Posted 13 years ago # -
I bet you'd get a lot more folk exercising hard if you could qualify for an exemption by athletic prowess. Mind you, it'd give more ammo to the foamers:
"You don't pay road tax!"
"Well, yes I do."
"Fine, but you don't pay fat tax!"
"You got me there, porkchop!"
"FUUUUUUUUUUUUU"Posted 13 years ago # -
It must be awful to have to count up how many calories are in everything you eat.
Anyway, surely it's pretty obvious: chocolate bars - don't eat too many of those etc.
In fact, don't make them a staple part of your diet. Just occasional, if required. I can't call them treats, because I've grown to not like most chocolate bars. I guess my palate has matured.
There you go, problem solved.
Posted 13 years ago # -
"Anyway, surely it's pretty obvious: chocolate bars - don't eat too many of those etc."
The chocolate bar is only an example but I actually do not think it is all that obvious. I have many many other examples which are not so obvious but it is not hard to figure out that if you think something does not have many calories then you will think it is okay to eat. I mean, a full sized chocolate bar with only 118 calories is practically a health food right?
Which brings me on to another food irritation. All those "low fat" things. That is really healthy right? Nope. They are stuffed with sugar to make up for the lack of fat. I once saw a packet of sweets with a huge label on the front saying "FAT FREE!" No wonder people are confused.
Someone on TV yesterday was making the point that a fat tax should only be used if there is a corresponding untax on healthy food - ie make it cheaper. I think this is a good point but only if it can be agreed what is healthy and what is not (syrup is not healthy even if it is fat free).
Posted 13 years ago # -
I suspect you've nailed it with the low fat food - the problem is eating too much packaged, refined, pre-prepared food. And then not getting any exercise.
Posted 13 years ago # -
I would rather see discounts/incentives for healthy foods
Eg fresh met,fish,veg etc opposed to healthy premade stuffPosted 13 years ago # -
That's already the case, in some ways; all but the most obviously recreational foodstuffs are exempt from VAT.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Value_Added_Tax_(United_Kingdom)
Posted 13 years ago # -
One of those annoying BBC videos confirming what I was ranting about above (why can't they have a "read me" version?), that people will eat more of something if it is sold in some way as being "healthy" ie Low Fat or Organic etc.
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-18601093
It is a clip from The Men Who Made Us Fat programme which I am annoyed I missed last night.
Posted 13 years ago # -
"which I am annoyed I missed last night"
Think it was obliterated by 'the tennis'.
iPlayer?
Posted 13 years ago # -
Nah I just forgot.
Posted 13 years ago # -
It's not as simple as tax the chocolate and pies. Lots of people are caught out by things like fast food salads which can easily have 500-800 calories. Shop sandwiches as well, often very calorific. You think you're making a healthy choice having salad in McDonalds, you'd have been better having a burger.
It's no good making nutritious healthy food cheaper and more available (important if you live somewhere where the only shop sells fish suppers and nappies) if people don't know what to do with it. So many people have no idea how to cook. I don't know if it should be the schools' job to teach people how to cook, or the parents', but if the parents never learned, how can the kids learn from them? Maybe the NHS and councils should be doing some health promotion work, running cooking classes for teenagers and adults.
Also, it's no use assuming that obesity is simply because people don't know how to make good food choices. I'm well aware of how to make good food choices, but I'm still fat. The reasons people overeat are often many and complex. It's not always about being greedy and lazy. I reckon 40% of my excess weight is down to greed and laziness, 10% is down to several years of various subsequent injuries which have affected my ability to exercise, and the rest is because of psychological factors I'm not going to go into here - factors which mean I'm more likely to choose greed and laziness rather than moderation and exercise.
Cycling Surgeon tweeted a link to an article recently about a man who had had gastric band surgery. The saddest part for me was that although he had lost loads of weight, he still wanted to overeat. Fitting the band reduced his stomach size, it didn't fix his psychological issues.
A tax on cake wouldn't affect me - I make my own. A tax on chocolate would affect my pocket but it wouldn't stop me buying it. Not that I buy much cheap chocolate, I tend to go for expensive Hotel Chocolat dark chocolate in the hope I'll eat less of it, and I'm not really into Galaxy etc; it's too sweet for me.
Posted 13 years ago # -
"Cycling Surgeon tweeted a link to an article recently about a man who had had gastric band surgery"
He had one himself and took up cycling.
Now he is 'in charge' of the CTC in Scotland and networking with senior NHS people.
Posted 13 years ago # -
It must be awful to have to count up how many calories are in everything you eat.
I'd imagine that it's even worse being a type 1 diabetic and having to count carbohydrate in everything you eat. (Then have people telling you that you got the disease from eating too much).
Sorry, rant over!
Posted 13 years ago # -
Rather long but interesting article on the BBC about junk food manufacturers sponsoring the Olympics. The statements from the manufacturers are telling. Cadbury's and Heineken come out best with their "yeah we sell chocolate/beer so what?" They are at least being honest, unlike some others.
Has anyone seen the Subway advert going about just now? Breathless, fit looking bloke eats enormous, mayonnaise soaked "sandwiches"* to fuel his breathless, blokey fitness stuff?
*I always thought a sandwich was some filling between two slives of bread and not multiple fillings inside an entire loaf.
Pfft.
Posted 13 years ago # -
@Min, yes I have and they are not just breathless, fit looking blokes, but breathless, fit looking ladies. I beleive they are all members of the Olympic squad and advert seems to be suggesting they need a good, healthy, Subway sandwich diet to maintain their peak athletic performance.
Pfft again.
Posted 13 years ago # -
"
Should a Fast Food Company Be Sponsoring the Olympics?"
Posted 13 years ago # -
"BBC News - Viewpoint: Ban junk food sponsors from Olympic sports"
Posted 13 years ago # -
@kirst "The reasons people overeat are often many and complex"
BBC2 is running an excellent series about this
Posted 13 years ago # -
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/health-28022948
Rather an old thread but I think this story about drinking water instead of sugary drinks fits in with some of the stuff that has been said.
Sugar producer AB Sugar said "demonising one ingredient" would not "solve the obesity epidemic".
Hehe, Yes they would say that. ;-)
Posted 11 years ago # -
Seems that talk of a "fat tax" for food is getting more common. I wonder what sort of rate they would need to have it at to have an impact since I just picked up over 1000 kcals of doughnuts from Tesco for 60p <nom nom nom>
Posted 11 years ago # -
A fat tax would be a dreadful idea as it would just mean even more sugar in processed food. A processed food tax might help but we all know that will never happen.
Posted 11 years ago # -
I listened to a really interesting podcast recently where the guy made a really interesting point that as processed food gets more and more sophisticated in terms of flavourings, real food gets blander and blander as it is made to grow faster and be full of water instead of flavour. Little wonder then that people are drawn to processed food and end up eating more and more of it and becoming ever fatter and more malnourished.
Here is the podcast if anyone is interested - it is the Intelligent Medicine Podcast - Part 1 Part 2.
The book he wrote is called The Dorito Effect because apparently the whole artificial flavour industry started when one man had the idea to coat corn chips with something in order to give them flavour. Fascinating and scary at the same time.
Posted 10 years ago #
Reply
You must log in to post.
posts
