Proposed legislation (S.B. 622) in California would impose a 1-cent per fluid ounce tax on sugar-sweetened beverages to finance a Children’s Health Promotion Fund. Introduced by Sen. Bill Monning (D-Carmel), the measure would apply to all sugar-sweetened beverage distributors whether their products are bottled or sold as concentrate. Intended to “discourage the excessive consumption of sweetened beverages by increasing the price of these products,” the proposal would also create a fund “allocated for the purposes of statewide childhood obesity prevention activities and programs.” To this end, the Children’s Health Promotion Fund would support, among other things, state- and community-based efforts to reduce consumption of “calorie-dense, nutrient-poor foods” and improve access to “healthy, safe, and affordable foods and beverages.” “This bill will combat the obesity crisis and ensure that our children—and future generations of Californians—are not doomed to a shorter life expectancy and can instead live longer, healthier lives,” Monning was quoted…
Tag Archives SSB
A recent study claims that both sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) and artificially sweetened beverage (ASB) consumption was associated with type 2 diabetes (T2D) risk in 66,118 women enrolled in a European prospective study. Guy Fagherazzi, et al., “Consumption of artificially and sugar-sweetened beverage and incident type 2 diabetes in the Etude Epidemiologique aupres des femmes de la Mutuelle Generale de l’Education Nationale—European Prospective Investigation into Cancer and Nutrition cohort,” American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, February 2013. French researchers reported that “women in the highest quartiles of SSB and ASB consumers were at an increased risk of T2D” compared with those who did not drink SSBs or ASBs, although randomized trials are still needed “to prove a causal link between ASB consumption and T2D.” “SSB and ASB consumption were shown to be directly and indirectly (possibly mediated by adiposity) linked with increased risk of T2D,” concluded the study. “Extensive and lasting changes in…
A group of Rhode Island legislators has proposed a bill that would impose a statewide penny-per-ounce tax on sugar-sweetened beverages. More specifically, the tax would apply to “any nonalcoholic beverage, whether naturally or artificially flavored, whether carbonated or noncarbonated, sold for human consumption, containing sugar, corn syrup or any other high-calorie sweetener, including, but not limited to, cola and other flavored drinks, and all other drinks and beverages commonly referred to as ‘soft drinks,’ ‘sodas,’ ‘sports drinks’ or ‘energy drinks.’” Exemptions to the tax would include 100 percent fruit and vegetable juices, infant formula and milk products. Products intended by manufacturers for use as dietary supplements or for weight-reduction aids would be exempt as well. Meanwhile, Vermont lawmakers have proposed a similar bill that would impose a penny-per-ounce tax on the sale of beverages containing added sugar or high-fructose corn syrup. Fifty percent of the revenues generated would be directed…
Rep. Joe Farias (D-San Antonio) has proposed a bill (H.B. 779) that would impose a statewide penny-per-ounce tax on soft drinks, particular sweetened beverages and the powders and syrups used to make them. The tax would increase each year by the same percentage as the “most recent annual revised Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers.” The legislation, which purportedly aims to fight obesity and supplement funding for health programs in public elementary and secondary schools, calls for 80 percent of the tax revenue collected to go to the Texas Education Agency and 20 percent to the Department of State Health Services. The proposed tax would apply to all nonalcoholic, carbonated and noncarbonated beverages and mixes that contain natural or artificial sweeteners. Exceptions to the tax would be certain sports drinks, 100 percent fruit and vegetable juices, infant formula, milk products, and beverages containing sweeteners that do not add calories.…
A recent analysis of young children enrolled in the National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES) 1999-2004 has reportedly claimed that sugar-sweetened beverage (SSB) consumption “was independently associated with alterations in lipid profiles, increased markers of inflammation, and increased waist circumference in children.” Ethan Kosova, et al., “The Relationships between Sugar Sweetened Beverage Intake and Cardiometabolic Markers in Young Children,” Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, February 2013. Analyzing data from 4,880 NHANES participants ages 3 to 11, the study relied on 24-hour dietary recall interviews to gauge SSB consumption in addition to examining the following cardiometabolic markers: (i) total cholesterol concentrations, (ii) high-density lipoprotein (HDL) cholesterol, (iii) low-density lipoprotein (LDL) cholesterol, (iv) triglyceride, (v) C-reactive protein (CRP), (vi) waist circumference, and (vii) body mass index percentile for age-sex. According to the study, multivariate linear regression analyses evidently demonstrated that “SSB intake in children aged 3 to 11 years…
Cancer Council, Diabetes Australia and the National Heart Foundation of Australia have issued recommendations about the sale and availability of sugar-sweetened beverages as well as launched a new public service announcement titled “Rethink Sugary Drinks.” According to a January 17, 2013, press release, the three organizations “have called for immediate action by governments, schools and non-government organizations such as sport centers to tackle one of the key contributors to obesity in Australia—sugary drinks.” In particular, the groups advocate (i) a government-sponsored social marketing campaign “to highlight the health impacts of sugar sweetened beverages consumption and encourage people to reduce their consumption levels”; (ii) a Federal Department of Treasury and Finance investigation “into tax options to increase the price of sugar-sweetened beverages or sugar-sweetened soft drinks, with the aim of changing purchasing habits and achieving healthier diets”; (iii) government restrictions on the marketing of sugar-sweetened beverages to children, “including through schools…
The NAACP’s New York state branch and the Hispanic Federation have joined those arguing in court that New York City’s restrictions on the size of sugary beverages sold by certain vendors, such as corner stores and delis, should not take effect on March 12, 2013. During the January 23 hearing, opponents, including several City Council members, apparently argued that the rule should have been adopted by the elected City Council rather than the mayor’s appointed health board and that it was too narrow, exempting certain other types of beverages and excluding convenience stores and supermarkets, to be fair. The American Beverage Association and groups including movie theater owners and Korean grocers were expected to oppose the rule, but the issue is reportedly complex for minority advocates in light of high obesity rates in the African-American and Hispanic communities. Still, these groups claimed in an amicus brief that the rule will…
The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) has published the results of a recent poll asking readers whether governments should regulate sugar-sweetened beverages. After presenting two arguments for and against government regulation, the poll received 1,290 votes from readers in 75 countries, with 68 percent of voters favoring “regulation of sugar-sweetened beverages to help reduce the burden of obesity.” In particular, the NEJM pollsters noted that the one outlier was the United States, where only 58 percent of voters favored regulation compared to the 84 percent from other countries. “Readers opposed to government regulation of sugar-sweetened beverages pointed out that the problem of obesity involves much more than the excess consumption of sugary drinks and that limitations on portion size or taxes on soft drinks will not alter the fundamental issue—that people need to change the way they live their lives,” concluded the “Clinical Decisions” article, which also included reader…
Soft drink manufacturers and restaurateurs have reportedly requested that the court reschedule oral arguments in their challenge to a New York City prohibition on the sale of sweetened beverages in sizes that exceed 16 ounces. N.Y. Statewide Coal. of Hispanic Chambers of Commerce v. NYC Dept. of Health & Mental Hygiene, No. 653584/2012 (N.Y. Sup. Ct., filed October 12, 2012). Additional details about the case appear in Issue 458 of this Update. According to a news source, the industry interests seek oral argument before January 2013, claiming it will take up to three months to “retool” their operations to comply with the new requirements, which will take effect in March 2013, if upheld by the court. City attorneys have apparently decided not to oppose the request, noting that everyone’s interest will be served if the matter is “resolved sooner rather than later.” See Reuters, December 5. 2012.
Voters in Richmond and El Monte, California, have rejected measures that would have taxed soda and other sugar-sweetened drinks at a penny-per-ounce rate. According to media sources, Richmond City Councilmember Jeff Ritterman initially proposed Measure N as a way to discourage residents from consuming sugary drinks, which he identified as a prime culprit behind the rise in diabetes, obesity, heart failure, and other related issues. “I’m disappointed, but overall I think this has been a positive for Richmond,” said Ritterman. “It’s started a great conversation in this community. I think President Obama should (propose a soda tax). [Governor] Jerry Brown should. This is just the beginning of the wave.” See San Francisco Chronicle, November 7, 2012. While 67 percent of Richmond’s electorate apparently voted against Measure N, 77 percent of voters in the Los Angeles suburb of El Monte also rejected a soft drink tax—an outcome that a November 7 Huffington Post…
