news details |
|
|
| Should there be a tax on fatty foods? | | | Dr. Pragya Khanna
In recent News the Kerala
government has pro
posed a 14.5 per cent 'fat tax' on burgers, pizzas and other junk food served in branded restaurants. Industry estimates suggest there are 50-60 outlets of organised fast-food restaurant chains in Kerala, including global brands McDonald's, Burger King, Pizza Hut, Domino's Pizza and Subway and the News of proposed tax announcement has raised many eyebrows and has let many with unanswered questions.
Kerala is the first state in India to introduce a "fat tax". According to a national family health survey, Kerala has the most number of people suffering from obesity after the northern state of Punjab in India. With increasing affluence, lifestyle diseases are on the rise and the government aims to check this with the fat tax. The government says the 14.5% tax is aimed at making people more conscious about food choices and curbing obesity. This is considered more of a preventive measure as Kerala's food habits are changing dramatically; people are eating a lot of junk food and rejecting the traditional food.
However, an argument popping up here says that a lot of local food is more fatty and unhealthy and the taxation should be comprehensive and acceptable to all the stakeholders and not discriminatory.
"Just because you serve pizza and burger doesn't mean other people are serving healthy food", say the local restaurant owners. Some think that people with lower incomes consume fast food as an easy meal option, and this tax may not be fair to them. They also feel that those with more money will buy and consume such food items even at a higher price.
Paradoxically, India has high rates of both obesity and malnourishment. According to the World Bank, the number of malnourished children is double that of sub-Saharan Africa; at the same time, India ranks third in the world for obesity, after the US and China, according to a study in the 'Lancet'. The dichotomy reflects the polarisation of India's population, where some of the world's poorest people live next door to some of the country's richest.
Many doctors blame India's ever-expanding waistlines on unhealthy eating habits imported from the west, and increasingly sedentary lifestyles in the rapidly urbanising nation.
The idea of imposing a fat-tax is not new however. Denmark introduced a fat tax in 2011 but repealed it by 2013 when it found consumers shopping across the border for high fat goods. Hungary taxes foods high in sugar, salt and fat. Mexico taxes sugary drinks, breakfast cereals and sweets. In the US, battles are being fought over taxes on sugary drinks. Philadelphia became the first major city in the US to introduce a soda tax.
Meanwhile, the Kerala government has plans to impose the tax on more food items, including refined flour goods and sugary drinks in the near future. According to a European Union report published in 2014, increased tax on sugary items or fast food does lead to reduced consumption.
However, it may also lead to customers switching to cheaper, less expensive alternatives. On the other hand, reports show that after two years of tax imposition on sugary beverages, the demand for the same continues to head upwards in Mexico. Mexico levies about 10% tax on sugary drinks, despite which the Mexican cola industry saw a rise this year. "The market shares of full-calorie Coca-Cola and Pepsi-Cola inched higher last year to 48% and 11%, respectively", according to Euromonitor, another data service," The Wall Street Journal.
The justification for tax imposition in the developed nations says that unhealthy eating has an impact not only on the person concerned but also on the rest of society. Obesity related diseases cost the UK £3.4bn per year. The cost of Obesity in the US is estimated at $75 bn. If we choose to eat foods that make us unhealthy and obese, this creates external costs on the government such as Medical Costs for treating obesity.
Lost productivity at Work e.g. Time off that people take because of sickness
Premature death
Therefore, the government should collect sufficient tax from unhealthy foods to pay for the external costs that they create. It is the same principle as to why petrol and cigarettes are taxed; e.g. higher petrol tax is justified because petrol causes pollution.
The WHO reports that "in 2008 1.5 billion adults, 20 and older, were overweight with a Body Mass Index (a proxy measurement of body fat based on height and weight) over 25 and that of these 1.5 billion overweight adults, over 200 million men and nearly 300 million women were obese (BMI > 30). Overall, more than one in ten of the world's adult population was reported to be obese. Once considered a high-income country problem, overweight and obesity are now on the rise in low- and middle-income countries, particularly in urban settings. Close to 35 million overweight children are living in developing countries and 8 million in developed countries."
The WHO notes that "Overweight and obesity are the fifth leading risk for global deaths. At least 2.8 million adults die each year as a result of being overweight or obese. In addition, 44% of the diabetes burden, 23% of the ischemic heart disease burden and between 7% and 41% of certain cancer burdens are attributable to overweight and obesity."
Since one of the factors that contributes to obesity is the inordinate amount of calories consumed, and given the fact that fats have more than twice as much calories (9 kcal/g) than protein and carbohydrates (4 kcal/g) on a gram basis, it is opined that introducing disincentives to fat consumption can curb the obesity epidemic.
An important reason why people continuously turn to unhealthy, fat, sugar and salt laden food, is the simple fact that it's often cheaper than a more wholesome meal comprised at least in part of fresh produce. A study done at the University of Washington found that "when they compared the prices of 370 foods… junk foods not only cost less… but junk food prices are also less likely to rise as a result of inflation".
Here the people in developing countries present a counterpoint that says instead of making healthy food more accessible, governments at different places are making all foods less accessible which is considered to be a harmful situation. Moreover, given that many individuals in lower socio-economic groups will have become used to eating "junk" food, when prices rise they will not necessarily move to the healthier alternative. It is likely that they will stick to what they know, and end up paying more from their limited budgets for it. The end result is likely to be that these people will still buy junk food first but will pay more and thus will not be able to afford any healthier foods.
After all the debate let's ponder over the issue a little more in the light of the fact that junk food consumption is increasing in the world and why are people falling more and more for it when it is known by and large that junk food is unhealthy. We know that poor nutrition is related to heart problems, high blood pressure, and a host of other health ailments. You might even know that studies show that eating junk food has been linked to increases in depression. Junk food is food that is calorie-dense and nutrient poor. In recent decades, junk food, fast food and convenience food consumption in the United States have increased dramatically, and since developed nations and their habits are aped in the developing world consequently, this trend has occurred concurrently world over with rising epidemics of numerous chronic diseases and this accounts for a long list of reasons why eating junk food is bad.
However, people become adherent to their habits of consumption of such food items and the science of reason behind it will surprise you.
1. Cravings: Steven Witherly is a food scientist who has spent the last 20 years studying what makes certain foods more addictive (and tasty) than others. Much of the science that follows is from his excellent report, "Why Humans like Junk Food". According to Witherly, when you eat tasty food, there are two factors that make the experience pleasurable. First, there is the sensation of eating the food, this includes what it tastes like. Food companies will spend millions of dollars to discover the most satisfying level of crunch in a potato chip. Their scientists will test for the perfect amount of fizzle in a soda. These factors all combine to create the sensation that your brain associates with a particular food or drink.
The second factor is the actual macronutrient makeup of the food, the blend of proteins, fats, and carbohydrates that it contains. In the case of junk food, food manufacturers are looking for a perfect combination of salt, sugar, and fat that excites your brain and gets you coming back for more.
2. Rapid food meltdown and vanishing caloric density: Foods that rapidly vanish or "melt in your mouth" signal to your brain that you're not eating as much as you actually are. In other words, these foods literally tell your brain that you're not full, even though you're eating a lot of calories. The result: you tend to overeat.
3. Sensory specific response: Your brain likes variety. When it comes to food, if you experience the same taste over and over again, then you start to get less pleasure from it. In other words, the sensitivity of that specific sensor will decrease over time. This can happen in just minutes.
Junk foods, however, are designed to avoid this sensory specific response. They provide enough taste to be interesting (your brain doesn't get tired of eating them), but it's not so stimulating that your sensory response is dulled. This is why you can swallow an entire bag of potato chips and still be ready to eat another.
4. Memories of past eating experiences: This is where the psychobiology of junk food really works against you. When you eat something tasty (say, a bag of potato chips), your brain registers that feeling. The next time you see that food, smell that food, or even read about that food, your brain starts to trigger the memories and responses that came when you ate it. These memories can actually cause physical responses like salivation and create the "mouth-watering" craving that you get when thinking about your favorite foods.
All of this brings us to the most important question of all. Food companies are spending millions of dollars to design foods with addictive sensations. What can you and I do about it? Is there any way to counteract the money, the science, and the advertising behind the junk food industry?
Unlike its western counterparts, India is still new to the concept of 'Fat Tax'. With Kerala government ushering in the move, I think we should educate the general masses about the pros and cons of eating junk food and suggest healthy alternatives which are also cost effective. |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
|
|
 |
|
|
|
|
STOCK UPDATE |
|
|
 |
| BSE
Sensex |
 |
| NSE
Nifty |
|
|
| |
CRICKET UPDATE |
|
|
|
|
| |
| |
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
