Yep,I get that. But it is T1's that will now be taxed for treating their medical condition as having sugary drinks or similar to hand is pretty much an essential part of emergency kit.
Sorry, I was working from memory and not doing very well at it.upper range starts at 8g, not 10g
Endurance sports means that I need to keep plenty of sugar on hand to make it through the duration of an event, and also to prevent the hypos from happening just when you don't need them to. Not always treating the hypo, is also used in order to prevent the hypo ever happening in the first place. A bg of 7 is all fine and dandy, but if the start of the race is about to happen in 15 minutes you need to get that level up sharpish if you want any hope of making it to the end.With respect, if you are having so many hypos it makes a difference, is that root cause not the focus of your attention?
Ditto.Sorry, I was working from memory and not doing very well at it.
Tbe use of sugar levvy on soft drinks appears to have had mucho success in Mexico, so it is not without precedent. Soft drink consumption in Mexico has reduced significantly since its introduction.Personally I think this tax is akin to closing the door after the horse has bolted. You see the debate and confusion on what makes a healthy diet and the emphasis on low-fat has been so drilled into us by schools, parents, health professionals etc. Not to mention that the truth about sugar has been around since atleast the early 80's but withheld until not only are we facing a massive diabetes/obesity epidemic but the addiction to sugar is well and truly established. If you look at alcohol, cigarettes, drugs and other addictive substances once the addiction is established those addicted will pay any amount to get their hands on it. True sugar may not register as an addiction in the same way, but it is an addiction just the same.
The other problem with this tax is that sugary drinks, though a problem, are only a single area of a persons diet. What about these carbohydrate heavy, unhealthy ready meals? Or how about other processed foods full of hidden sugar?
Solving this crisis could be as drastic as needing detox clinics that train people to make healthier food choices and helping people learn to cook at home.
Sorry for the rant!
Yes this is a good start but too little too late in my opinion.
Perhaps an incentive to advertisers and the plain simple water would be good..
Tbe use of sugar levvy on soft drinks appears to have had mucho success in Mexico, so it is not without precedent. Soft drink consumption in Mexico has reduced significantly since its introduction.
Like I said I'm not really against the tax in any way really. I'm mostly just curious to see where it's going and what it will affect. The only slight issue I'm having is that I do tend to buy a fair bit of diet soda and as a student I worry about tiny increases in objects I buy a lot of.
Still, I think the fact that they are pushing that money into health and fitness is a good thing.
Yuh, would be super unhelpful. My partner says it isn't legal for them to do that but I could see them getting around it by making the diet ones a couple pennies more expensive or less expensive than the taxed sugar ones. I dunno, I hope it turns out well and reduces the sugar addiction but I don't think it's going help as much as they seem to think.Hopefully manufacturers wont increase the cost of diet soda drinks as that is whole point of the tax - to encourage people to buy the sugar free versions!
Yep, and any company that is being taxed for something is just going to stick that cost onto the price of all their products.I think there is a large misunderstanding.
This measure is a Levy on the manufacturer not the consumer.
It is not targeted as a Tax/Duty on the end product.
The Levy is designed to encourage the Manufacturer to change the product.
Actually it is the raw ingredients that should be taxed. This however would adversly affect the sugar refiners, the farmers, the importers, and ALL products containing sugar (including Starbucks shakes). It may also affect sucralose and Stevia sweetners, and as pointed out above, boost sales in aspartame and saccarin products. It would also probably affect the sugar alcohol business , and the alcohol business. It would also increase the price of basic processed foods and so called low fat meals and spreads. Cost of jam and breakfast cereals would increase, but it would get to those things that the soft drinks tax does not reach.Yep, and any company that is being taxed for something is just going to stick that cost onto the price of all their products.
Could maybe have the right effect if the retailers were the ones to collect the tax for every sugary drink sold, like with the plastic bags. You would then definately have a difference in pricing between the products and the retailers would be less inclined to stock the sugary drinks as they will have to then hand over a greater amount of money to HMRC.
But by taxing the manufacturer, if they have any sense, they will just spread the cost across all their product lines and carry on making plenty of money selling whatever sells best for them.
The retailers are the ones with the power to make us change what we buy, the manufacturer doesn't actually control the marketplace in the same way and will just do whatever is needed to flog the most product through the retailers.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?