|
Description:
|
|
Seven American cities have approved ballot measures in favor of soda taxes. Public health expert Kris Madsen of the University of California, Berkeley explains how smoking and a subsequent tobacco tax set the precedent for the more recent sugar-sweetened beverage taxes.
Transcript:
"I think the tax that we saw on tobacco is really similar to the tax that you know supporting for sugar-sweetened beverages. So smoking is a great precedent. And in fact, this is one of the reasons that we think about why sugar-sweetened beverages as opposed to kind of anything that's out there that might fall into a junk food category. What we don't have in the U.S., anymore, and this is good news, we don't have a problem with people needing empty calories. I mean there have been times when hunger has been so severe that it would have been great to feed even empty calories, just calories on the table, right. That's not a problem now. There are still people who are hungry, but the solution is not giving them empty calories. It's getting healthier food into the emergency food system, for example. So tobacco and the taxes on tobacco are a great analogy when we're just talking about something like sugar-sweetened beverages because it's a luxury. It's something that you should - you know the American Heart Association just came out with new recommendations for kids, no more than six teaspoons of added sugar a day, and that kids shouldn't have more than one sugar-sweetened beverage a week, right? That's a huge recommendation and they're acknowledging, look, it's a little bit like a luxury tax on alcohol or cigarettes. That's your choice that's fine, but clearly it should only happen occasionally. "
Listen to a related episode:
https://soundcloud.com/sciencetoday/soda_public_health |