Despite your feelings about brussels sprouts, would you eat them if they were cheaper than crisps? To fight obesity, a report from the U.S.’s Institute of Medicine and National Research Council recommends taxing junk food, while giving tax breaks to grocery stores in disadvantaged communities, requiring calorie counts on restaurant menus, and opening school playgrounds and athletic fields to communities.It has been argued that a tax on junk food would have a negative impact on poorer communities. However, this report outlines strategies for promoting healthy eating options and education, plus ways to increase exercise no matter what your socio-economic status is.
According to the Department of Health, approximately 1 in 4 adults in England are obese and the cost of overweight and obese individuals to the NHS is estimated to be £4.2 billion. Preventing obesity is cheaper than treating obesity.
Do you think a government imposed tax on junk food is a viable way to prevent obesity? Or, does it take away your rights as a consumer?
Image: Eschipul - Flickr
Posts
2 comments:
Great post-- very controversial. It has been suggested that one of the strong links between poverty and obesity is in the fact that often the worst foods are the cheapest and the easiest to make. Personally, so little seems to be agreed upon in terms of "what's good for you" that regulating and taxing food on this basis would be difficult. Can you imagine the back-room dealing and lobbying as junk food manufacturers try to get their products off the black list? It will never happen.
It sounds unenforceable to me and too much like a quick-fix solution. I'm also not sure that junk foods are always cheaper - it's more to do with their convenience. Education is vital: teach the kids to cook.
Post a Comment