• Guest - w'd love to know what you think about the forum! Take the 2025 Survey »

Sugar Tax

And there was me thinking I was agreeing with you in that they are "charging" the wrong part of the process and that the manufacturers will just be increasing the costs of everything to cover this additional charge for them being able to carry out their business.

The government is going to be collecting money from sugary drink producers, doesn't really matter if it's corporation tax, NI, rate or anything else, or which department of the government it's going to, people on the street will be calling it a tax and the cash will more than likely go through the HMRC bank account at some stage on it's way to whichever government department then hands it out to wherever.

They should be implementing this in a different way to have the effect that they want. It is consumers and retailers that should be feeling the pinch due to this "tax" as they will then make different choices for what they purchase. Charging a "tax" on the manufacturer is too far down the chain as they don't get to decide what the consumer purchases and if they go for the diet or full fat soda.
 
spideog said:
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.
Click to expand...

Your not treating a "medical condition" (diabetes) with sugary drinks. What you are actually doing is correcting the "side effect" of the drug (insulin) when it puts you under for whatever reason.. I appreciate the balancing act isn't easy..

No wonder the "average Joe" don't know wheather to spike us with "mo slin" or pour in the Tate & lyle...
 
I saw this on our news here tonight about UK introducing a sugar tax. If you use soft drink to treat your hypos then I guess it will cost more. For me I use juice... I have those boxed juices everywhere. You use what is best for you to treat hypos. I have a very bad moving throat and the last thing I need is some sort of sugar stuck down my throat and I'm choking and not able to get my sugars up. There's only one type of juice I can tolerate without too much pain and that's the apple and blackcurrant. I don't have to use it that often though. I've been good lately aside from a few missed night time hypos. But those juices are a life saver for me. I carry soft lollies too but find they take a lot longer to work on me... plus again they're sticky and don't always go down too well. I don't think they're considering a sugar tax here though... in my view I'm not sure a sugar tax would make much difference... just like smokers they still buy their cigarettes here even though they're now talking about the possibility of raising a pack of cigarettes to $40.
 
The "Sugar Tax" is no different to the bank levy of recent years. It is a charge to an industry group to encourage a change in behaviour. As a result, how the industry recoups that additional cost of business is entirely up to them.

From a Type 1 perspective, as someone has said elsewhere, if an increase in the cost of Lucozade or Coke as a result of the levy is a financial burden on you, then you are having too many hypos and probably need to review your care/treatment plan.
 
tim2000s said:
...if an increase in the cost of Lucozade or Coke as a result of the levy is a financial burden on you, then you are having too many hypos and probably need to review your care/treatment plan.
Click to expand...
I'm sure that the plastic bag "tax" is not actually a financial burden on anyone. However, it was sufficient an additional charge that people have changed their habits in order to avoid paying for plastic bags.

You don't need to be financially crippled by some charge or other in order to have an opinion on it's existence. And I don't have to be having a significant number of hypos for an extra charge on the cost of dealing with a hypo to be of interest to me and for me to want to avoid paying extra if at all possible.
 
It all generates "revenue" for the budget on the "war on terror."
So now we can all sleep soundly in our beds....


.... Unless yer prone to hypos.
 
Jaylee said:
It all generates "revenue" for the budget on the "war on terror."
So now we can all sleep soundly in our beds....


.... Unless yer prone to hypos.
Click to expand...
even hypo's can be sleep inducing in their own way.
 
I can see the problem even though you presumably don't have to pay for any meds at all, not only insulin, test strips and such diabetes related?
 
noblehead said:
It would be DD but when out and about it's quite handy just to purchase a bottle/can from a shop, bottled water is one of the biggest rip-off around and it can vary in price from 30p to £2/£3 a bottle in some cases.
Click to expand...

I just have a very small plastic round container in my handbag containing the sugar cubes...No good for guys! One in car, one on bedside table.


Astronomic prices for water I agree but they could give incentives to the water drinks..(without the added flavours)...
 
In terms of water it would be cheaper if no one paid the ridiculous prices. Personally I won't pay more than £1 for my water (I personally won't drink tap water, but asda, tesco etc do 2l for around 50p which I like to stock up on)
 
I generally work on the assumption that anything that makes Coca-Cola executives deeply unhappy is probably a good thing...
 
Sporran? Posset pouch? Bum bag? We have ways......
 
You guys with the hypo's. You are using the wrong stuff: Lucozade is a wimp's drink
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-35831125
 
Oldvatr said:
You guys with the hypo's. You are using the wrong stuff: Lucozade is a wimp's drink
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-35831125
Click to expand...

But it comes in convenient bottles not cans like some of those : D

To those suggesting people drinking Lucozade must need their insulin regime sorted, remember that pregnant and breastfeeding women can have unexpected lows for which fast acting Lucozade is ideal, and there are other groups of people too who can need a 'liquid sugar top up' through no fault of their own.

I think education would be better than a tax personally. When I see people with trolleys full of two litre sugary drinks, those drinks are often surrounded by poor food choices, so I do wonder if this tax will help much.
 
azure said:
and there are other groups of people too who can need a 'liquid sugar top up' through no fault of their own.
Click to expand...

I take full responsibility with the "rock & roll lifestyle", needing one handy stageside just in case... But then, these drinks tend to get thrown in with the "rider" anyway..
 
No doubt greedy vendors will charge the same prices for non-sugary drinks and use the excuses they didn't know the difference!
 
On balance I am pleased with the sugar tax-it sends a clear signal that like tobacco and alcohol sugar has its downside.
 
Im not in favour of the sugar tax, I often need 2 sips of Lucozade to get rid of a hypo, mind you, a few pence on top of a bottle doesnt bother me. Sugar in water doesn't do the trick because it could be too far to walk to the kitchen, and then it has to dissolve. Fruit juice doesn't work quickly enough for me - very insulin sensitive and long term type 1 (46 years) on really low doses but often hypo.
 
Southport GP said:
On balance I am pleased with the sugar tax-it sends a clear signal that like tobacco and alcohol sugar has its downside.
Click to expand...

But it is such a small part of the problem. They need to tackle fructose in all forms but how can they when we have been pushed fruit juices as healthy for so long. I do not understand why milkshakes and fruit juices are exempt.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Menu
Log in
Register
Cookies are required to use this site. You must accept them to continue using the site. Learn More.…