Sugar ‘like alcohol and cigarettes’
Sugar is fuelling a global obesity pandemic, according to experts
SUGAR should be controlled in a similar way to alcohol and tobacco because it is so damaging to public health, according to a team of experts.
The authors of an article that appears in the journal Nature today argue that sugar is fuelling a global obesity pandemic that contributes to 35 million deaths each year across the world from diseases including diabetes, heart disease and cancer.
The public health experts from the University of California, San Francisco, propose regulating it in a similar way to alcohol, by means such as taxing sugary products so that the cost doubles, reducing the number of places that such food can be bought, and designating an age limit, such as 17, for the purchase of drinks with added sugar.
A ban on television adverts for products with added sugars would also help protect children’s health, they argue.
The team wrote: “How can we reduce sugar consumption? After all, sugar is natural. Sugar is a nutrient. Sugar is pleasure. So too is alcohol, but in both cases, too much of a good thing is toxic.”
A recent report found that more than a quarter of adults in Scotland are obese, costing the health service more than £450 million a year, with warnings the rates could hit 40 per cent by 2030.
The authors of the article in Nature argue obesity is only a marker of the problem, and many people who are not obese also suffer health problems from sugar. They said it alters metabolism, raises blood pressure, affects hormones and damages the liver. These they say are health hazards that mirror the effects of drinking too much alcohol – itself created by distilling sugar – and, therefore, it should be tackled in a similar way.
“We recognise that societal intervention to reduce the supply and demand for sugar faces an uphill political battle against a powerful sugar lobby, and will require active engagement from all stakeholders,” the authors wrote.
“But tectonic shifts in policy are possible, such as bans on public smoking, and the introduction of condom dispensers in public bathrooms. It’s time to turn our attention to sugar.”
Worldwide consumption of sugar has tripled during the past 50 years and is viewed as a key cause of the obesity epidemic.
Laura Schmidt, professor of health policy and one of the authors, said: “We’re not talking prohibition. We’re not advocating a major imposition of the government into people’s lives.
“We’re talking about gentle ways to make sugar consumption slightly less convenient, thereby moving people away from the concentrated dose. ”
Professor Naveed Sattar, professor of metabolic medicine at the University of Glasgow, agreed greater regulation of sugar “would have some merit”. He thinks sugary drinks, such as Coca-Cola and Irn Bru but also those including fruit juices, are a particular problem.
Professor Mike Lean, chair of human nutrition at the School of Medicine at Glasgow Univeristy, said: “I think the most useful thing a government could do would be to put a hefty tax on drinks which contain over 8 per cent sugars.”
Email to a friend
Print this page
Looking for...
Featured advertisers
Jobs
Search for a job
Motors
Search for a car
Property
Search for a house
Weather for Edinburgh
Monday 28 May 2012
Today
Sunny
Temperature: 9 C to 21 C
Wind Speed: 15 mph
Wind direction: North east
Tomorrow
Cloudy
Temperature: 10 C to 16 C
Wind Speed: 12 mph
Wind direction: North east
Comments
There are 15 comments to this article
Page 1 of 1
Alternative (High Octane) Fuel Head
Friday, February 3, 2012 at 02:51 PMFirst they came for the communists, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a communist. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Then they came for the trade unionists, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a trade unionist. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Then they came for the Jews, and I didn't speak out because I wasn't a Jew. ----------------------------------------------------------------------------- Then they came for the Catholics, and I didn't speak out because I was Protestant. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Then they came for me and there was no one left to speak out for me. ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Alternative (High Octane) Fuel Head
Friday, February 3, 2012 at 02:49 PMFernando: I don't think that you'll find much sugar in beer. Why not switch to drinking that?
RyanJones
Thursday, February 2, 2012 at 07:07 PMthey talk about all the things that are bad for you all the time, but will never admit when they are wrong and LEGALISE MARIJUANA.
Rob I
Thursday, February 2, 2012 at 05:54 PMI suggest the sugar industry starts to make under the table "arrangements" with law makers as this ridiculous story is being disseminated through out Europe and North America. Maybe I can write a blues song about it called "Sugar Blues."
Kobi
Thursday, February 2, 2012 at 02:58 PMAll the supporters of the smoking ban or minimum pricing for alcohol that scoffed when it was pointed out that this is the way the health lobby works, one small step at a time, promising that it is necessary for the health of our children, and all the while secretly planning to ensure that there is a total ban on products that these people dislike, should hang their heads in shame, for ever being part of the push behind such fascistic nonsense. Vote for independence for a sugar-free Scotland, all policed by Salmond's narks.
A Friend of Fernando Poo
Thursday, February 2, 2012 at 12:13 PMI've been drinking a litre-an-a-half bottle of pop every day for decades. Lately I've moved mainly to sugarless but according to the link here, even that's bad for you: www.theregister.co.uk20120201diet_pop_will_friggin_kill_ya
A Friend of Fernando Poo
Thursday, February 2, 2012 at 12:09 PMI'm starting to wonder whether expertise has now become such a great threat to natural human liberty that it ought to be regulated and taxed.
Alternative (High Octane) Fuel Head
Thursday, February 2, 2012 at 12:01 PMYet more bile from the numpties in white coats. Withdraw their funding and make them get proper jobs.
moosef
Thursday, February 2, 2012 at 11:20 AMWho are these people? Who do they think they are?. I dont drink or smoke tobacco but love sweet tea and sugary coca-cola. Go away if you think Ill have that regulated. Not even my wife has managed. I read a book in the late '70s called the Sugar Blues which stated much of what these so called boffins say so theres nothing new here. Just academics trying to make a name for themselves
bifter
Thursday, February 2, 2012 at 08:39 AMI'm a liberal in the true sense of the word so I don't agree with taxing alcohol or tobacco to the hilt. So, naturally, I regard this proposal as pure nonsense. However, as a liberal, I also believe in personal responsibility. There's a case for saying, if you smoke and get lung cancer, drink and get cirrhosis of the liver or get fat and get diabetes you should be expected to contribute to your treatment. There are so many obese people around these days (I can remember when they were fairly rare!) and, I'm sorry but I have to be honest, they really disgust me. I can accept that they may have low self-esteem but that doesn't change the fact that they really need to sort themselves out. As I say I'm not one for compelling folk but we need to somehow engender the notion of personal responsibility. It's something we've lost.
MrsPaul
Thursday, February 2, 2012 at 08:06 AMI find the language one of the so-called experts uses worrisome-she wants sugar to be regulated like alcohol and tobacco then says she's not suggesting prohibitions and '...a major imposition of government...'. She caps it all by saying she just wants '...gentle ways to make sugar consumption slightly less convenient, thereby moving people away from the concentrated dose...' It's not her job-I raised my children to avoid excessive sugar because as a mum it was MY job. It is the work of parents to raise a sensible, healthy child and I didn't need some self-important expert to tell me that excessive sugar didn't need to be part of my children's diet. I wonder, was this trio part of the American public health experts group who just wasted California tax payer monies by calling for the banning of infant circumcision in the San Francisco area? They raised quite the tempest over that. When reading this latest bit, we should consider the source.
paulr
Thursday, February 2, 2012 at 08:05 AMBLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH BLAH more so called experts, ban alcohol ban tobacco ban sugar. If this or any other government were really serious about removing the hazard fo smoking, they would shut down the tobacco companies. That will never happen because it would almost certainly bankrupt the country, 95% of the cost of a packet of fags is tax, 95% just imagine the tailspin the treasury woud go into if that income suddenly vanished.
Hector the Lessor
Thursday, February 2, 2012 at 06:42 AMThere are lemondade drinkers and lemonade drinkers. The guys who drink too much are fat. That useless piece of information has been around for years. However the good news is that those guys have an easy way to lose weight. They just give up drinking lemonade.
wayneb
Thursday, February 2, 2012 at 04:27 AMLike most things, better education commencing at an early age. I first landed in Scotland in the mid 70s and since then have noticed a rapidly growing contingent of 'fat folk'. Their obesity serves no-one any good, least of all themselves and the NHS. While I disagree with 'controlling' sugar, I do agree that a lot of so called 'food' could be eliminatedmarkedtaxed or whatever to remind folk that it is simply bad for them. After all, if they're too stupidincapabledumb to care for themselves, then those who are responsible for paying for their ills - e.g., the government - should at least have a voice in the matter.
Charles Linskaill
Thursday, February 2, 2012 at 01:21 AMThe team of so called experts, Can stick their Government Controlled advice Where the Sun don't Shine, We give our Government the benefit of the doubt, and give them an inch so they want a mile!, And bring in more than Crazy Laws to control every step we take in our lives, Next in Line, Having Sex, Will be Super-Taxed, Never mind our poor old sugar that millions of us have the rights to enjoy!
Page 1 of 1
Your view
Please sign in to be able to comment on this story.