Welcome to Debate Club! Please be aware that this is a space for respectful debate, and that your ideas will be challenged here. Please remember to critique the argument, not the author.
Should junk food be taxed?
Options
Replies
-
svetskisampion wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »svetskisampion wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »svetskisampion wrote: »Janejellyroll asked me for evidence as to what food consumption has a link to burdens on health services. My reply was think diabetes, not "diabetes is caused by sugar". The intake of unhealthy foods has a serious burden on health services due to the wide range of issues they create, to think otherwise is like saying alcohol has no burden on the health services. What you eat plays a big role in how your heart functions, how your blood sugar spikes, the impact on your stomach, mental fatigue, there are numerous studies on this in the UK and sugar has been identified to be the greatest cause of this.
If diabetes isn't caused by sugar, then what is the connection to food consumption?
Give a diabetic two spoons of sugar and we'll see the correlation. There are so many foods out there with hidden sugars which are the cause for so many health issues. If you think sugars and processed foods are not the leading cause for the health epidemics in the western world, you are entitled to that opinion. However I strongly believe what you shovel down your throat has the greater impact and I stand by that whole heartedly.
If you give someone who already has diabetes two spoonfuls of sugar, of course you're going to see a certain result.
But you seem to be arguing something different -- that sugar actually causes people to develop health problems, even if they are within a healthy weight. What evidence do you have for that?
How did you determine that "hidden sugars" (which aren't a thing in the US, by the way, we have ingredient labels on our foods) cause health problems and that it isn't excess weight?
You can stand by your opinion all you want, that's your right. I'm asking if you have any evidence to support that opinion that you can share with the rest of us.
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/health/news/8514091/Junk-food-Britain-costs-the-NHS-more-than-cigarettes-or-alcohol.html
That article is about obesity. Again, do you have any evidence to support the claims you've made?1 -
svetskisampion wrote: »svetskisampion wrote: »janejellyroll wrote: »svetskisampion wrote: »Janejellyroll asked me for evidence as to what food consumption has a link to burdens on health services. My reply was think diabetes, not "diabetes is caused by sugar". The intake of unhealthy foods has a serious burden on health services due to the wide range of issues they create, to think otherwise is like saying alcohol has no burden on the health services. What you eat plays a big role in how your heart functions, how your blood sugar spikes, the impact on your stomach, mental fatigue, there are numerous studies on this in the UK and sugar has been identified to be the greatest cause of this.
If diabetes isn't caused by sugar, then what is the connection to food consumption?
Give a diabetic two spoons of sugar and we'll see the correlation. There are so many foods out there with hidden sugars which are the cause for so many health issues. If you think sugars and processed foods are not the leading cause for the health epidemics in the western world, you are entitled to that opinion. However I strongly believe what you shovel down your throat has the greater impact and I stand by that whole heartedly.
I see this 'hidden sugar' demon quoted a lot, but I don't understand where it comes from. Here in the US, the food label must contain the total amount of sugars that a given food serving contains (don't know if this is true in the UK or not), so where exactly is the sugar hiding? I know the ingredients may not say 'sugar', but the nutrition information still has the total sugars, so again, where is it hiding? And as an added bonus, sometime either this year or next, the food label will have to specify the ADDED sugars and not just the total sugar.
I don't think anyone is arguing that the quantity of food that you shovel down your throat is the leading cause of problems, just that foods in general should not be demonized because no single food is the cause of all the health issues (including sugar).
I understand your confusion. The term hidden sugars in the UK is used as a term for added sugar. So for example, healthy fruit juices have "hidden sugar". We too have the labelling, yet it is the distinction between natural sugars and these "hidden sugars" which is the main concern.
You refer to something as "hidden" when it's listed in the ingredients? Is there an alternate meaning to "hidden" that I'm not aware of?1 -
3dogsrunning wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Isn't candy already taxable? Could have sworn I payed tax on my candy bar the last time I purchased one....but not all candy is junk food either....what about Dark Chocolate? Sweetened drinks, why sweetened? Would that include sweet tea, lemonade, milk, chocolate milk? ----Can't find any redeeming quality about chips except they are yummy...lol
That's what I was thinking - "junk food" is already taxed.
No junk food is taxed like any other food like lettuce, apples, etc in most states. I'd assume the op is talking about something more than the regular sales tax.
Where I am (in Canada) food like lettuce, apples,etc are not taxed. Candy bars, chips etc. are.
That seems to make sense - real food (like produce) should be the easiest to acquire from an economic standpoint, IMO.0 -
PrimalForLife wrote: »3dogsrunning wrote: »Packerjohn wrote: »Isn't candy already taxable? Could have sworn I payed tax on my candy bar the last time I purchased one....but not all candy is junk food either....what about Dark Chocolate? Sweetened drinks, why sweetened? Would that include sweet tea, lemonade, milk, chocolate milk? ----Can't find any redeeming quality about chips except they are yummy...lol
That's what I was thinking - "junk food" is already taxed.
No junk food is taxed like any other food like lettuce, apples, etc in most states. I'd assume the op is talking about something more than the regular sales tax.
Where I am (in Canada) food like lettuce, apples,etc are not taxed. Candy bars, chips etc. are.
That seems to make sense - real food (like produce) should be the easiest to acquire from an economic standpoint, IMO.
Making it cheaper doesn't always increase availability in a given place though. That depends on the local demand. For instance, I never realised broccoli could wilt until I moved here, and the produce sections are much smaller in the big shops. They're basically non existent in the smaller convenience shops. That's quite different to where I grew up. If it's wanted, someone will sell it...0 -
The term hidden in this sense relates to an item one would consider a healthy option. The sugar in this is thus, hidden.0
-
svetskisampion wrote: »The term hidden in this sense relates to an item one would consider a healthy option. The sugar in this is thus, hidden.
Can you provide some examples?0 -
svetskisampion wrote: »The term hidden in this sense relates to an item one would consider a healthy option. The sugar in this is thus, hidden.
The term "hidden", in any sense, relates to something that is concealed or deliberately difficult to detect. Just because people assume that something is "healthy" and therefore won't have added sugar does not make anything "hidden", particularly when it is right there on the label.
Even when a product does not have a label, it doesn't make added sugar "hidden". It's an ingredient. Any cook worth their salt (or sugar) knows that sugar is added to a vast amount of dishes, and has been for a very long time, even savoury dishes. Doesn't make it hidden.
4 -
Alatariel75 wrote: »svetskisampion wrote: »The term hidden in this sense relates to an item one would consider a healthy option. The sugar in this is thus, hidden.
The term "hidden", in any sense, relates to something that is concealed or deliberately difficult to detect. Just because people assume that something is "healthy" and therefore won't have added sugar does not make anything "hidden", particularly when it is right there on the label.
Even when a product does not have a label, it doesn't make added sugar "hidden". It's an ingredient. Any cook worth their salt (or sugar) knows that sugar is added to a vast amount of dishes, and has been for a very long time, even savoury dishes. Doesn't make it hidden.
Jesus Christ, it's the terminology used in the UK - so yes, where I'm from, it's hidden sugar.0 -
WinoGelato wrote: »svetskisampion wrote: »The term hidden in this sense relates to an item one would consider a healthy option. The sugar in this is thus, hidden.
Can you provide some examples?
https://eluxemagazine.com/magazine/hidden-sugars-in-10-common-foods/
Hope that satisfies - if not, let me know, I'll spend the rest of my years researching to cite Google-able sources.1 -
svetskisampion wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »svetskisampion wrote: »The term hidden in this sense relates to an item one would consider a healthy option. The sugar in this is thus, hidden.
Can you provide some examples?
https://eluxemagazine.com/magazine/hidden-sugars-in-10-common-foods/
Hope that satisfies - if not, let me know, I'll spend the rest of my years researching to cite Google-able sources.
If you don't know that there's sugar in most of those foods, you're daft. The only real outliers are sushi and bread. Sushi because people who haven't made it don't know it's in there (though it always had been, so ignorance rather than "hidden") and bread, because the article is wrong. I just went to the Tesco site and looked at their white breads, and even the 50p Tesco brand white bread does not have any sugar. The articles claim that white bread is "full of sugar" is full of ***t.
Eta: USA bread does happen to be full of sugar. But it's not the norm.0 -
suzannesimmons3 wrote: »svetskisampion wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »svetskisampion wrote: »The term hidden in this sense relates to an item one would consider a healthy option. The sugar in this is thus, hidden.
The term "hidden", in any sense, relates to something that is concealed or deliberately difficult to detect. Just because people assume that something is "healthy" and therefore won't have added sugar does not make anything "hidden", particularly when it is right there on the label.
Even when a product does not have a label, it doesn't make added sugar "hidden". It's an ingredient. Any cook worth their salt (or sugar) knows that sugar is added to a vast amount of dishes, and has been for a very long time, even savoury dishes. Doesn't make it hidden.
Jesus Christ, it's the terminology used in the UK - so yes, where I'm from, it's hidden sugar.
No its not. I'm from the uk and hidden sugar as a phrase isn't a thing (or where I am it isnt)
I guess you don't watch much TV or read the news then...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/guides/z8849j61 -
svetskisampion wrote: »suzannesimmons3 wrote: »svetskisampion wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »svetskisampion wrote: »The term hidden in this sense relates to an item one would consider a healthy option. The sugar in this is thus, hidden.
The term "hidden", in any sense, relates to something that is concealed or deliberately difficult to detect. Just because people assume that something is "healthy" and therefore won't have added sugar does not make anything "hidden", particularly when it is right there on the label.
Even when a product does not have a label, it doesn't make added sugar "hidden". It's an ingredient. Any cook worth their salt (or sugar) knows that sugar is added to a vast amount of dishes, and has been for a very long time, even savoury dishes. Doesn't make it hidden.
Jesus Christ, it's the terminology used in the UK - so yes, where I'm from, it's hidden sugar.
No its not. I'm from the uk and hidden sugar as a phrase isn't a thing (or where I am it isnt)
I guess you don't watch much TV or read the news then...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/guides/z8849j6
It's just a buzzword. It's not legitimate vernacular. It's basically a clickbait phrase3 -
suzannesimmons3 wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »svetskisampion wrote: »WinoGelato wrote: »svetskisampion wrote: »The term hidden in this sense relates to an item one would consider a healthy option. The sugar in this is thus, hidden.
Can you provide some examples?
https://eluxemagazine.com/magazine/hidden-sugars-in-10-common-foods/
Hope that satisfies - if not, let me know, I'll spend the rest of my years researching to cite Google-able sources.
If you don't know that there's sugar in most of those foods, you're daft. The only real outliers are sushi and bread. Sushi because people who haven't made it don't know it's in there (though it always had been, so ignorance rather than "hidden") and bread, because the article is wrong. I just went to the Tesco site and looked at their white breads, and even the 50p Tesco brand white bread does not have any sugar. The articles claim that white bread is "full of sugar" is full of ***t.
Eta: USA bread does happen to be full of sugar. But it's not the norm.
Sugar is sometimes added to breads to feed the yeast. It's been added since forever but it would be on a lable and hardly.hidden.
Yup, and even with that, it's still not in even the cheapest white bread at Tesco. There are other ways to feed yeast. White bread being "full of sugar" as per the article is complete guff.0 -
Alatariel75 wrote: »svetskisampion wrote: »suzannesimmons3 wrote: »svetskisampion wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »svetskisampion wrote: »The term hidden in this sense relates to an item one would consider a healthy option. The sugar in this is thus, hidden.
The term "hidden", in any sense, relates to something that is concealed or deliberately difficult to detect. Just because people assume that something is "healthy" and therefore won't have added sugar does not make anything "hidden", particularly when it is right there on the label.
Even when a product does not have a label, it doesn't make added sugar "hidden". It's an ingredient. Any cook worth their salt (or sugar) knows that sugar is added to a vast amount of dishes, and has been for a very long time, even savoury dishes. Doesn't make it hidden.
Jesus Christ, it's the terminology used in the UK - so yes, where I'm from, it's hidden sugar.
No its not. I'm from the uk and hidden sugar as a phrase isn't a thing (or where I am it isnt)
I guess you don't watch much TV or read the news then...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/guides/z8849j6
It's just a buzzword. It's not legitimate vernacular. It's basically a clickbait phrase
Oh, even though the NHS uses the exact phrase too?0 -
svetskisampion wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »svetskisampion wrote: »suzannesimmons3 wrote: »svetskisampion wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »svetskisampion wrote: »The term hidden in this sense relates to an item one would consider a healthy option. The sugar in this is thus, hidden.
The term "hidden", in any sense, relates to something that is concealed or deliberately difficult to detect. Just because people assume that something is "healthy" and therefore won't have added sugar does not make anything "hidden", particularly when it is right there on the label.
Even when a product does not have a label, it doesn't make added sugar "hidden". It's an ingredient. Any cook worth their salt (or sugar) knows that sugar is added to a vast amount of dishes, and has been for a very long time, even savoury dishes. Doesn't make it hidden.
Jesus Christ, it's the terminology used in the UK - so yes, where I'm from, it's hidden sugar.
No its not. I'm from the uk and hidden sugar as a phrase isn't a thing (or where I am it isnt)
I guess you don't watch much TV or read the news then...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/guides/z8849j6
It's just a buzzword. It's not legitimate vernacular. It's basically a clickbait phrase
Oh, even though the NHS uses the exact phrase too?
A quick Google of NHS and hidden sugar didn't bring up a single nhs.uk site using that phrase. Added sugar, yes. Hidden sugar, no.0 -
Alatariel75 wrote: »svetskisampion wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »svetskisampion wrote: »suzannesimmons3 wrote: »svetskisampion wrote: »Alatariel75 wrote: »svetskisampion wrote: »The term hidden in this sense relates to an item one would consider a healthy option. The sugar in this is thus, hidden.
The term "hidden", in any sense, relates to something that is concealed or deliberately difficult to detect. Just because people assume that something is "healthy" and therefore won't have added sugar does not make anything "hidden", particularly when it is right there on the label.
Even when a product does not have a label, it doesn't make added sugar "hidden". It's an ingredient. Any cook worth their salt (or sugar) knows that sugar is added to a vast amount of dishes, and has been for a very long time, even savoury dishes. Doesn't make it hidden.
Jesus Christ, it's the terminology used in the UK - so yes, where I'm from, it's hidden sugar.
No its not. I'm from the uk and hidden sugar as a phrase isn't a thing (or where I am it isnt)
I guess you don't watch much TV or read the news then...
http://www.bbc.co.uk/guides/z8849j6
It's just a buzzword. It's not legitimate vernacular. It's basically a clickbait phrase
Oh, even though the NHS uses the exact phrase too?
A quick Google of NHS and hidden sugar didn't bring up a single nhs.uk site using that phrase. Added sugar, yes. Hidden sugar, no.
Search for NHS sugar exposed leaflet.0 -
This hidden sugar discussion is absurd. Again, as I said above, people are not getting lots of calories from sugar because they are tricked or can't see sugar on a label, that's an excuse.
Here's (https://www.nhs.uk/Livewell/Goodfood/Pages/Top-sources-of-added-sugar-in-our-diet.aspx) a source from the NHS showing what the main sources of added sugar in the UK diet are:
(1) table sugar, jams, chocolate and sweets (27%)
(2) soft drinks, fruit juice, and other non-alcoholic drinks (25%)
(3) biscuits and cakes (20%)
(4) alcoholic drinks (11%)
(5) dairy products, such as flavoured milks, yoghurts and dairy-based desserts like ice cream (6%) -- note, these are as obvious as the others
(6) savory foods (the so-called hidden sugars) -- 5%
So not only is it a silly buzzword, it's basically irrelevant.
4
Categories
- All Categories
- 1.4M Health, Wellness and Goals
- 391.6K Introduce Yourself
- 43.5K Getting Started
- 259.7K Health and Weight Loss
- 175.6K Food and Nutrition
- 47.3K Recipes
- 232.3K Fitness and Exercise
- 393 Sleep, Mindfulness and Overall Wellness
- 6.4K Goal: Maintaining Weight
- 8.5K Goal: Gaining Weight and Body Building
- 152.7K Motivation and Support
- 7.8K Challenges
- 1.3K Debate Club
- 96.3K Chit-Chat
- 2.5K Fun and Games
- 3.3K MyFitnessPal Information
- 23 News and Announcements
- 931 Feature Suggestions and Ideas
- 2.3K MyFitnessPal Tech Support Questions