Don't Tax My Sugar
I’ve had sugar on the brain for the past few weeks. For one, I have been testing some lower-sugar dessert recipes for my hospital’s patient menu. Then, my husband came home from work and said that one of his employees said he heard that sugar is just as addictive as heroin and cocaine. “What’s up with that?” he asked.
Well, what’s up with that, for those of you who don’t know, is that recent studies have shown that sugar poses dangers to health (such as chronic disease and premature death) that justifies controlling them like alcohol and tobacco products.
I don’t think anyone would argue with the authors that many people consume an excessive amount of sugar every day—up to 500 calories or 30 teaspoons of the sweet stuff. In fact, sugar consumption has tripled over the last 50 years. Foods with added sugars can be abused and are connected to high blood pressure, insulin resistance, diabetes, obesity, and liver damage.
However, is it the government's place to step in?
Some of the governmental interventions that have been proposed in response to the ''sugar epidemic'' are:
So you may be wondering, where does Dietitian Becky stand on this topic? First, let me state that I am a firm believer in ''knowledge is power," truth in advertising, a free enterprise system and I oppose government regulation if at all possible. I despise scare tactics and shock-phrasing such as sugar is ''toxic," ''evil," ''public enemy number one," and ''as addictive as cocaine and heroin." I understand that sensationalism sells, but let’s stick to the facts.
With sugar, the issue is quantity, plain and simple. You can have about 7% of your calories coming from sugar (6-7 teaspoons daily on a 1500-1800 calorie diet) with no problems. Go over-board with consumption day after day…month after month…and health problems can start to develop.
I remember when I lost my recess in second grade because a few classmates couldn’t keep their mouths shut. I hated being punished for something I did not do. So you can probably guess as to how I feel about having my sugar taxed. With 27 years of nutrition counseling experience, I can say with confidence that people (myself included) do not like being told what not to eat or drink. No one values the words of the ''food police.'' And when someone is told not to have a certain food, guess what they want…the forbidden food… and usually in binging amounts.
As a dietitian, I will be the first to say that the sugar listing on a food label stinks. A can of pop contains 40 grams of sugar…what the heck does that mean? So first, let’s give consumers the knowledge they need and report the sugar listing on a food label as the ''added sugar'' amount in the food. List it in teaspoons and show it as a percentage of your daily upper limit as well—then it will actually mean something.
While I work with 11 million adult SparkPeople members, I also teach weight management classes in my community for children, teens and their parents. I have worked with several hundred families over the past several years. Therefore, I read with great interest the results of a research study that was also published at the same time as this sugar-sensation hit the media. It did not make headline news or national TV or radio shows, but to me, it offered a glimmer of hope to truly solving our obesity crisis.
The study focused on parents and 4-year-old preschoolers attending classes that focused on parenting skills. These classes were NOT about obesity, eating healthy, exercising, or limiting TV. Rather, these classes taught parents how to reinforce good behavior, discipline without physical punishment, improve social skills, and deal with emotions, stress and boredom. Four years later, when these children were 8 years old, those who had participated in the classes with their parents had less than half the rate of obesity as the control group. This was a surprising discovery that was not even an initial part of the studies.
The families with whom I work struggle daily with parenting appropriately and effectively…don’t we all? These are caring, loving adults who just don’t have the knowledge, experience, time, or resources regarding raising their children in a healthy fashion, both mentally and physically.
Think about it. Our children who are stressed or bored discover outlets for their anxiety using a computer screen and a bag of chips. Our children who struggle with making friends start turning to cookies for friendship. Children entertain themselves during mealtime with the TV versus having a conversation with their parent at the table. Perhaps, the solution to our country’s weight issue lies not with the taxing of sugar, but rather the implementation of a strong, functioning family unit. I have a feeling it will greatly benefit our children as well as the adults involved. While it may be easier and quicker to just lobby for a new law or tax, I hardly feel it is effective in really getting to the root of the problem.
So what do you think? Do you want our government to implement a sugar tax? Would this decrease your sugar intake? Would sugar regulations improve your health or the health of our society? What techniques will really turn the obesity crisis around?
Well, what’s up with that, for those of you who don’t know, is that recent studies have shown that sugar poses dangers to health (such as chronic disease and premature death) that justifies controlling them like alcohol and tobacco products.
I don’t think anyone would argue with the authors that many people consume an excessive amount of sugar every day—up to 500 calories or 30 teaspoons of the sweet stuff. In fact, sugar consumption has tripled over the last 50 years. Foods with added sugars can be abused and are connected to high blood pressure, insulin resistance, diabetes, obesity, and liver damage.
However, is it the government's place to step in?
Some of the governmental interventions that have been proposed in response to the ''sugar epidemic'' are:
- Taxation -- paying an extra $1.00 for a can of pop
- Purchasing rights based on age -- your 14-year-old couldn’t buy a candy bar at the store
- Bans from school functions -- no more sports drinks at soccer games
- Zoning ordinances for selling the stuff -- no fast food establishments near schools
- TV commercial regulations -- no more sugar-sweetened cereal commercials
- Food labeling laws
- The removal of fructose from the food listing as Generally Recognized As Safe (GRAS)
So you may be wondering, where does Dietitian Becky stand on this topic? First, let me state that I am a firm believer in ''knowledge is power," truth in advertising, a free enterprise system and I oppose government regulation if at all possible. I despise scare tactics and shock-phrasing such as sugar is ''toxic," ''evil," ''public enemy number one," and ''as addictive as cocaine and heroin." I understand that sensationalism sells, but let’s stick to the facts.
With sugar, the issue is quantity, plain and simple. You can have about 7% of your calories coming from sugar (6-7 teaspoons daily on a 1500-1800 calorie diet) with no problems. Go over-board with consumption day after day…month after month…and health problems can start to develop.
I remember when I lost my recess in second grade because a few classmates couldn’t keep their mouths shut. I hated being punished for something I did not do. So you can probably guess as to how I feel about having my sugar taxed. With 27 years of nutrition counseling experience, I can say with confidence that people (myself included) do not like being told what not to eat or drink. No one values the words of the ''food police.'' And when someone is told not to have a certain food, guess what they want…the forbidden food… and usually in binging amounts.
As a dietitian, I will be the first to say that the sugar listing on a food label stinks. A can of pop contains 40 grams of sugar…what the heck does that mean? So first, let’s give consumers the knowledge they need and report the sugar listing on a food label as the ''added sugar'' amount in the food. List it in teaspoons and show it as a percentage of your daily upper limit as well—then it will actually mean something.
While I work with 11 million adult SparkPeople members, I also teach weight management classes in my community for children, teens and their parents. I have worked with several hundred families over the past several years. Therefore, I read with great interest the results of a research study that was also published at the same time as this sugar-sensation hit the media. It did not make headline news or national TV or radio shows, but to me, it offered a glimmer of hope to truly solving our obesity crisis.
The study focused on parents and 4-year-old preschoolers attending classes that focused on parenting skills. These classes were NOT about obesity, eating healthy, exercising, or limiting TV. Rather, these classes taught parents how to reinforce good behavior, discipline without physical punishment, improve social skills, and deal with emotions, stress and boredom. Four years later, when these children were 8 years old, those who had participated in the classes with their parents had less than half the rate of obesity as the control group. This was a surprising discovery that was not even an initial part of the studies.
The families with whom I work struggle daily with parenting appropriately and effectively…don’t we all? These are caring, loving adults who just don’t have the knowledge, experience, time, or resources regarding raising their children in a healthy fashion, both mentally and physically.
Think about it. Our children who are stressed or bored discover outlets for their anxiety using a computer screen and a bag of chips. Our children who struggle with making friends start turning to cookies for friendship. Children entertain themselves during mealtime with the TV versus having a conversation with their parent at the table. Perhaps, the solution to our country’s weight issue lies not with the taxing of sugar, but rather the implementation of a strong, functioning family unit. I have a feeling it will greatly benefit our children as well as the adults involved. While it may be easier and quicker to just lobby for a new law or tax, I hardly feel it is effective in really getting to the root of the problem.
So what do you think? Do you want our government to implement a sugar tax? Would this decrease your sugar intake? Would sugar regulations improve your health or the health of our society? What techniques will really turn the obesity crisis around?
![]() You will earn 3 SparkPoints |
NEXT ENTRY > How Blogging Helped Me Lose 50 Pounds























Comments
The government already is in, because they are subsidizing the production of sources of sugar like High Fructose Corn Syrup.
Pulling the subsidies off of unhealthy foods and/or taxing them, and then either keeping the money or using it to push down the prices of healthier options wouldn't exactly be hurting anyone's freedom to chug a case of cola if they wish.
Also, imposing a tax (or removing subsidies) does not mean that it has to be the ONLY thing you do. You're presenting a false dichotomy that indicates that we must choose one or the other. There is absolutely no reason that steps to stop making highly processed food artificially cheap can't be taken at the same time as other measures are put in place to encourage good health. - 2/29/2012 11:57:30 PM
The governement, namely this current admin, is a FAILURE at its own job....protecting the rights of the people. Big Brother may think they know what is best for the masses but this is a country of choice. Instead of worrying about what people are sticking in their mouths they should be balancing the budget.
Geez...Why do people think a nanny state is the way to go??? If someone wants to eat a 5 pound bag of sugar a day....that is their choice...why should I care, why should you care and above all why should the government care????!!!
Enough of this liberal agenda......I find it rather offensive. - 2/28/2012 9:53:07 AM
I do not agree with the governments constant attempts to step in and try to monitor and regulate our eating for us. Those of us that care learn it without being forced by the government's taxation efforts.
Sadly - there are people who don't really care about proper nutrition no matter what the government does and I really don't think that's going to change. - 2/27/2012 11:31:35 AM
I'm leaning towards printing the truth about sugar. Then people can make their own choice as to how much. And yes, I work with children who's parents allow them to eat tooooo much sugar and suffer the consequences. But there are no easy answers. - 2/26/2012 9:45:02 AM
Also educate parents on how to parent children and eating healthy is one of the topics. - 2/25/2012 12:26:19 PM
If a person chooses to eat themselves into oblivion and obesity, isn't that THEIR choice??? Stop telling people how to live ... "Survival of the fittest" remember that!! If you want to do something, cut off FREE HEALTH CARE for those who have been warned about their weight issues and refuse to try to improve. - 2/25/2012 8:24:17 AM
Don - 2/25/2012 1:12:10 AM
www.npr.org/2012/02/17/147047545/sh
ould-sugar-be-regulated-like-alcoho
l
Don, Co-Leader of All Health Professionals, Binghamton Area Losers & Laid Off But Staying Strong SparkTeams - 2/25/2012 1:07:44 AM
- 2/24/2012 8:51:57 PM
Taxes are not the answer. - 2/24/2012 6:44:56 PM
But the truth is that people are going to do what they want to do. Which is why taxing cigarettes hasn't stopped kids and adults from smoking. They know it is dangerous. They watch people in their families and communities get sick and die, and light-up another one. Taxing the cigarettes means that they steal them from their mother's purse or pool their money together with like-minded kids. They do the same thing with alcohol. Except they get an other brother/cousin/buddy to buy it for them.
Sugar is an addiction. And deprivations is going to make them want it even more. People know that it can lead to diabetes and weight gain, yet they don't want to go without it. They need it. I saw a 10 year old at a school that I worked in kick down a fence so that he could run to the corner store. Why? He wanted something sweet. Had I told him how dangerous it was, would he have decided to grab an apple instead. Probably not.
We live in a fast food nation and sweets come along with the package. So people who decide to give up sugar do so because
1) they are aware of the dangers of consuming it and
2) they are willing to do what is necessary to limit their intake of it.
Most people aren't willing to take that type of responsibility. Any measures taken to limit or control sugar intake will result in increased efforts to get around them. Pooling money together, looking for sales, getting others to buy it for them. etc.
Just like someone can go to some stores and buy one cigarette or one beer. I see a day when people will be able to go into a store and for 25 cents buy a few pieces of candy. Oops! They already have those. They are called candy vending machines. You can find a lot of them at the malls in the area. Any tax proposed will be added to the price and raise it 10 cents or so, and kids will be able to get their fix anytime they want. It won't work. - 2/24/2012 3:42:43 PM
Taxation won't stop people from eating the sugar, but, like taxing cigarettes, it will help mitigate the exobitant cost in poor health for those who abuse sugar. Ditch sugar and refined grains, fellow fat folks, and just SEE how great you look and feel! - 2/24/2012 3:02:35 PM
I am not advocating fast food or sugar consumtion but a moderate calorie sports drink like say Gatorade 2 and some granola bars or oatmeal cookies are very appropriate for a young athlete. Reality is an occasional candy bar wont hurt them either. The point is supposed to be balance and moderation.
I just read about the military food overhaul and wonder what they are going to do. Young men in Marine basic training all come out pretty lean. I don't think there calories should be cut. They need to eat some rich foods to get 4000+ calories they need in in a day.
We still have active healthy people on the world that need, yes I said need, some calorie dense foods. - 2/24/2012 2:38:49 PM
I personally do not believe the government should tell me what I as an individual can and cannot eat. I should be responsible for what I do or don't put in my mouth. But even if you disagree with me on this point you would have to agree that regulating excess sugar is only one component of people's bad food choices. We will have to regulate a lot more than excess sugar if we want to give the government control of our dietary choices to improve our health. - 2/24/2012 11:47:35 AM
That said, I'm not really sure that this is the top of my list for changes to our food system. I think better labeling, improving the quality of school meals, eliminating government subsidies to factory farms, eliminating restrictive tariffs, and finishing the task of getting trans fats out of food should have higher priority. But I don't entirely rule out a small tax on sugary drinks to fund healthier food options. - 2/24/2012 11:36:41 AM
It's coming - so dont be surprised when it does. Plus I think we're all missing the bigger picture as in who will be benefiting from these taxes. No One thats who. People will still buy it and pay a higher tax and not have any additional knowledge about it. Who did it benefit? not the people
Do we really have to have a hundred different names for sugar? Maybe if the labels and big food co. didnt have rights to mislead the public into thinking they're product is good for you.
Dextrin - Dextrose - Maltodextrin - Sucrose - Xylose - Sorghum - Saccharose
Even sugar alcohols in DIABETIC foods are not void of sugar - what do you think sugar alcohol is made from? you guessed it, SUGAR.
- 2/24/2012 11:28:38 AM
This is more a social behavior issue and everyone should be involved in helping.
The big companies are mandated in other countries to sell more healthy products but in the US. - 2/24/2012 9:13:22 AM
09/why-a-big-mac-costs-less-than-a-
salad/
THAT is a problem. I wouldn't have a problem with a sugar tax. A salt tax too. Then maybe people will learn to COOK in a more healthy way.
But if not TAX, there certainly shouldn't be SUBSIDY. It's just going in the other direction and for all the "government shouldn't be involved" people, subsidy is still government involvement.
If we're not making it harder to get sugar, we certainly shouldn't be making it easier just because some multi-billion corporations are begging the government for a handout so they can make more money. - 2/24/2012 9:05:26 AM
We do need something to make us more aware of how much sugar we eat. 7 teaspoons of sugar is about 60 grams, which is 1/3 of what Americans eat daily on average.
Have two servings of dairy (without flavorings), a serving of whole fruit, spaghetti sauce, and salad dressing, and you're at that 60 grams ~ without having a desert, or a mocha, or even instant flavored oatmeal. - 2/24/2012 8:25:23 AM
And they want to remove fructose?! Most fruits and berries have fructose. So then someone is going to have to make up a new way to get all the other nutrients we would be missing by not eating fruit.
I have a better idea for people: Stop eating so much crap! - 2/24/2012 8:12:45 AM
Please Log In To Leave A Comment: Log in now ›