Browse > Home / News / Visiting researchers propose sugar tax

Visiting researchers propose sugar tax

Posted on March 3, 2010, 8:08am and updated on March 4, 2010 at 8:37 am

Higher taxes on sweets and soft drinks could help slow the spread of diabetes, Australia’s fastest growing chronic disease.

Researchers visiting the Greater Green Triangle University Department of Rural Health have called on Australian governments to adopt a long-term plan for healthy eating choices similar to anti-smoking campaigns.

The suggestion came from Finnish health promotion experts Erkki Vartiainen and Tiina Laatikainen who suggested Australian governments consider tougher regulations and higher “junk food” taxes that could lead to a new eating culture.

“We need to make healthier choices the easier choices,” Prof Vartiainen said.

He said a concerted, ongoing campaign was required to change health policy and people’s lifestyles.

“We need to compare diabetes to smoking. It was found in the 1950s and 60s that smoking was bad for your health but it took more than 20 years before anything started to happen on a policy or health promotion basis,” Adjunct Professor Laatikainen said.

“In the 1970s it was a new idea to have a non-smoking area, now it is the norm. Culture changes take a long time.”

Prof Vartiainen and Prof Laatikainen, who have just completed a two-week study tour, said higher taxes on sweets and junk food would be a deterrent.

“In Finland there is great concern about childhood obesity which has been linked to increased snacking. Our government has introduced additional taxes to try to promote a new eating culture and it is working.”

They also support Australian government moves to regulate junk food advertising during prime children television viewing times and recommended schools be encouraged to remove snacks and soft drinks from their canteens.

The pair from Finland’s National Institute for Health and Welfare believes the extensive diabetes program adopted by Victoria should be adopted elswehere.

“From a worldwide perspective, Victoria is doing very well with diabetes prevention and we hope to learn from these experiences,” Professor Vartiainen said.

Professor Vartiainen said that the prevalence of diabetes was continuing to grow around the world and it was important that education and prevention programs be maintained and extended.

“Issues such as obesity, physical activity and diet are contributing factors but can be addressed by lifestyle changes prompted by health education programs.”

He said it was critical that health promotion programs such as the Life diabetes support be extended to a wider population.

“Health services centres can only serve those already with problems or at risk of contracting serious diseases,” he said.

“We need to spread the good health message to the wider population as a preventative measure.”

The Greater Green Triangle University Department of Rural Health is a partnership between Flinders University and Deakin University.

It includes the Flinders University Medical School Complex in Mount Gambier.

Tags: , ,  

Comments

6 Responses to “Visiting researchers propose sugar tax”

  1. the diplomat on March 4th, 2010 7:52 am 1

    How about the govt subsidise fruit and veg and other healthy food choices instead of slugging parents with another levy?

    t the end of the day though it comes done to education and making correct choices. Sadly we are on 2nd generation poor eaters and what walks in parents, runs in children.

    The cycle of bad eating needs to be broken, but it is hard when it costs so much to buy healthy food and it is cheaper for parents to buy junk. I wonder if making junk food more expensive will do it or whether it means people will make sacrifices of other things to continue buying the junk.

    Cigarette prices are constantly increased yet I often wonder if it makes people quit or if to feed their addiction they sacrifice something else? Did alcopop tax work?

    Behaviour stems from values, values stem from world view. If there is to be any real paradigm shift on this issues or others we cannot simply just address the behaviour. The worldview of people needs to be challenged and changed.

  2. Maybe on March 4th, 2010 1:51 pm 2

    couldn’t agree more diplomat.

    Half the problem with obesity too is a lack of exercise. Instead of hiking junk food prices how about subsidising gym fees or personal trainer fees to encourage people to be more active? I’d use a personal trainer everyday if I could afford it, but the costs are too much.

    Emotional eaters are going to be stressed over increasing financial burdens and will remain trapped in poor living cycles. It’s a lose lose, and the only person who wins are the government coffers.

  3. Ebony Jackson on March 4th, 2010 4:27 pm 3

    I have to agree with you Maybe — lack of exercise = obesity.
    I don’t think gyms and personal trainers are the answer either — this would be a luxury most people could never even contemplate.

    Motivation is what many people are unable to achieve — but just basic walking —  no cost attached — you just need to find the time — motivate the space in your head and move it.

    Emotional eating is usually a learned behaviour that results from boredom and habit.
    Emotional problems = comfort eating.

    It is never easy to break lifetime patterns — Mount Gambier is up for the challenge, though — just needs someone to get this show on the road — a motivational mover and shaker.

  4. Maybe on March 4th, 2010 5:04 pm 4

    but a motivational mover and shaker is exactly what personal trainers do!

    SO in a sense you disagree with me by saying it’s a luxury most people can’t afford, when my point was that they should be cheaper to make them more accessible.

    Personal trainers work. There’s no doubt about it. So they should be more affordable. This could be the EXACT key to reducing obesity.

  5. Ebony Jackson on March 4th, 2010 6:06 pm 5

    Okay — to be clearer, personal trainers cost money. Even if it was cheaper many low income people would not be able to pay.
    Where as walking under your own steam, no fee to pay up front, no membership needed…you just don’t need a babysitter to tell you to walk.
    No appointments to arrange and when you are done, the walk has been in your own time at your own pace, and no fee to budget around.
    Personal trainers and life coaches ARE a luxury and you don’t need these to be active, if you cannot afford them.
    Responsibility for your obesity begins and ends with you.

  6. the diplomat on March 4th, 2010 8:24 pm 6

    again I think these things are mentioned are behavioural and are good to address but once the subsidy ran out or the trainer left etc. what would they default to? A worldview change is what is really needed for long term benefits where people actually see healthy choices as the norm and it becomes not a matter of choice. An alcoholic may be ok with suppport networks but take them away and he/she is at a higher risk until they get that deeper worldview change which then effects values and then behaviour. Thats an extreme example but I am sure you get my point.

Posting of new comments is currently disabled.