Daily Dose of Common Sense

With childhood obesity rates climbing, many people are looking for ways to turn the tide. One report out this week strongly suggests that junk food and sugary sodas should be taxed by state and local governments. According to the article, tobacco taxes have been shown to be effective in reducing tobacco use. So, they argue, taxes on soft drinks and fattening foods could do the same for the obesity rates in this country.

No one can deny that childhood obesity–and adult obesity–are problems. From the article:

“The prevalence of childhood obesity has tripled in just three decades,” the report reads. Nearly 18 percent of U.S. adolescents are obese.

While the food and restaurant industry cites personal choice and a lack of exercise, many reports have shown that unhealthy food is cheaper, more readily available and more heavily marketed than more healthful foods.

This is definitely cause for concern. But, are taxes really the answer?

First, who determines what “junk” food qualifies for the tax? This could be a very fine line. Soft drinks…chocolate…fast food…popsicles…flavored yogurt? Where does the list end? Plus, it would be very hard to get a fair assessment of all the foods that contribute to weight gain. You can bet that some special interest group would use every trick in the book to keep their products tax-free. For example, the soft drink lobby has not responded favorably to finger-pointing thus far:

Last week, the American Heart Association took on the $115 billion soft drink industry, saying the drinks are the No. 1 source of added sugars in the American diet.

The American Beverage Association, representing companies including PepsiCo, Coca-Cola Co and Dr Pepper Snapple Group Inc, says sugar-sweetened drinks do not pose a particular health risk.

Second, the tax would mostly hit the people who can’t afford it. According to an article in Time Magazine, childhood obesity “discriminates by income: 22.4% of 10-to-17-year-olds living below the poverty line–less than $21,200 for a family of four–are overweight or obese, compared with 9.1% of kids whose families earn at least four times that amount.” So, the tax wouldn’t teach the lower-income families how to eat better; it would only have them pay more for what they currently know how to do.

How about more education for the lower-income families on how to buy fresh and healthy food more economically? For example, apples, bananas, and cheese aren’t expensive, and these are great snacks for kids. Grocery store chains could offer classes on purchasing healthy food for kids. Or, what about cost incentives in low-income neighborhoods to customers who purchase fresh fruits and vegetables?

Schools are starting to do their parts to educate kids about nutrition and take away access to all the sugary soda and candy. Healthier lunch options are also being made available. Will it be enough? Probably not, if the parents aren’t on board as well.

It seems as if no one wants to address the real issue, which is knowledge and access. Throwing money at obesity, even in the form of higher taxes, isn’t the answer.

Photo courtesy of Flickr: D Sharon Pruitt

This entry was posted on Thursday, September 3rd, 2009 at 12:33 pm and is filed under Family. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.