Sugary drinks tax? What about drinks for hypos?

Hi again @Amrit1712

Just looking at your profile I notice your 15 years old..
I remember back when I was 15 using a bike "in anger". So I do commiserate with the hypos.
You may need to cut back on your dosage with the exercise your doing. But that might mean a whole new thread chatting with the more sporty T1s..

I may be wrong but I seem to remember (for some reason) @Diamattic might able to fill in a few blanks?

im a big fan of the KA drinks, however they aren't sugar free and have twice as much sugar in as coca cola, but I buy them mostly cos they are cheap at usually 89p per 500ml bottle, or £1 per 2 litres at a supermarket. I could see a reason if they shot up in price.

If your having a hypo you need to get back to a decent BSL quickly, so take a proper slug of it, not a couple of sip's especially if your on your own.
If you start acting up you'll get little support from the general public, they will steer clear thinking your either on drugs or drunk!

Once up and running you can then monitor your BS and take a correction dose to calm it down...

I found http://www.runsweet.com useful in helping me work with my diabetes when participating in sports.

The sugar tax issue reminds me over Tesco's Ribena controversy. Realistically, there are many hypo treatments, and we will all have our preferences. I think I'm very lucky to have life saving medications paid for, for my diabetes. Asthmatics don't get that help. I'd also say if be happy to pay a Contribution. Oh wait, that's partly what my tax and NI contributions do! Is sugar tax just Nanny state or is it a way of legitimately trying to address a problem? Seems it's just more scapegoating and scaremongering. Fruit juices and smoothies are so healthy these days - many match sugared fizzy drinks for sugar content yet are 'healthy' options. Plus who owns innocent?

If I have to pay a little more to get out of a hypo hell, to keep myself and potentially others from harm, so be it. A few pence more or hundreds, maybe thousands for emergency care paid for by the NHS.

The sugar tax is about saving lives. Mexico was a good example where benefit was seen in the first year. That's the point - reducing T2 diabetes incidence and amputations, heart disease, kidney failure and all the other complications.

Lucozade is not the only option we have. We could easily by glucose tabs and make our own drink. Personally, an extra 20p for a bottle of Lucozade to save 1000s of lives and well being is a no brainer. Education doesn't matter when there is no cost implication. This has been all but proven with tobacco as a good example.

I think also people need to look at other ways to better manage their diabetes I'd they are having to consistently rely on sugary drinks in such quantities as this is not the most healthiest way to treat your body and becomes a bit self defeating with regards to the point of exercise. It isn't always straightforward as everyone reacts differently to exercise but it shouldn't be overlooked!

jddukes said:

The sugar tax is about saving lives. Mexico was a good example where benefit was seen in the first year. That's the point - reducing T2 diabetes incidence and amputations, heart disease, kidney failure and all the other complications.

Lucozade is not the only option we have. We could easily by glucose tabs and make our own drink. Personally, an extra 20p for a bottle of Lucozade to save 1000s of lives and well being is a no brainer. Education doesn't matter when there is no cost implication. This has been all but proven with tobacco as a good example.

I think also people need to look at other ways to better manage their diabetes I'd they are having to consistently rely on sugary drinks in such quantities as this is not the most healthiest way to treat your body and becomes a bit self defeating with regards to the point of exercise. It isn't always straightforward as everyone reacts differently to exercise but it shouldn't be overlooked!

Click to expand...

Sugar's also very bad for your teeth.

I use lucozade because you never know how many hypos you will have and to order something on prescription is a huge hassle. Secondly it's easier to drink something than chew or bite something, in a hypo situation where each second really can matter.

Speaking as someone who only eats sugar (with reluctance) when i can't/don't manage to avoid it, so they can tax it all they like.

I always grin when they hike tax on alcohol for the same reason.

Is fructose going to be affected by the tax too? That would be something to celebrate.

I try to live in ketosis. Gives me better energy levels, better stamina, and virtually eliminates the hypos. All good reasons to avoid sugar (and sugar taxes).

Jaylee said:

The liver should also dump glycogen too, during exercise? But I could be wrong..

Click to expand...

It will do when your blood sugar is low enough, but (for me anyway) when I'm exercising a lot I can't rely on my liver all the time because a) I'll gradually get used to being lower as my body tries to avoid having to dump all its glycogen so my lows get more risky, and b) it takes a day or so for my liver to 'reload', so if I'm low before that sometimes it just won't kick in, or not enough to fix the problem. I tend to go for longer acting carbs beforehand if I can but in an emergency a high sugar liquid is for me a must (much as I hate lucozade ).

jddukes said:

The sugar tax is about saving lives. Mexico was a good example where benefit was seen in the first year. That's the point - reducing T2 diabetes incidence and amputations, heart disease, kidney failure and all the other complications.

Lucozade is not the only option we have. We could easily by glucose tabs and make our own drink. Personally, an extra 20p for a bottle of Lucozade to save 1000s of lives and well being is a no brainer. Education doesn't matter when there is no cost implication. This has been all but proven with tobacco as a good example.

I think also people need to look at other ways to better manage their diabetes I'd they are having to consistently rely on sugary drinks in such quantities as this is not the most healthiest way to treat your body and becomes a bit self defeating with regards to the point of exercise. It isn't always straightforward as everyone reacts differently to exercise but it shouldn't be overlooked!

Click to expand...

I'm stuck on the fence when it comes to the tax. Yes, if it helps the health of our nation but where does it end? Some form of personal responsibility must be applied somewhere along the line.

Taking sugar on board is certainly not self defeating when I'm exercising. I couldn't run without my jelly babies - which may as well be called sugar babies! With years of experience my BG levels will be no higher after exercising despite taking a JB for every mile run.

Scardoc said:

Some form of personal responsibility must be applied somewhere along the line.

Click to expand...

Sadly, for the majority of the population, personal responsibility went out of the window a long time ago. And you have to start somewhere.

tim2000s said:

Sadly, for the majority of the population, personal responsibility went out of the window a long time ago. And you have to start somewhere.

Click to expand...

Exactly tax on Cigarettes and alcohol is higher than most other goods, another thing that should be done is to stop VAT exemption for all cakes regardless of their sugar content.

jddukes said:

The sugar tax is about saving lives. Mexico was a good example where benefit was seen in the first year. That's the point - reducing T2 diabetes incidence and amputations, heart disease, kidney failure and all the other complications.

Lucozade is not the only option we have. We could easily by glucose tabs and make our own drink. Personally, an extra 20p for a bottle of Lucozade to save 1000s of lives and well being is a no brainer. Education doesn't matter when there is no cost implication. This has been all but proven with tobacco as a good example.

I think also people need to look at other ways to better manage their diabetes I'd they are having to consistently rely on sugary drinks in such quantities as this is not the most healthiest way to treat your body and becomes a bit self defeating with regards to the point of exercise. It isn't always straightforward as everyone reacts differently to exercise but it shouldn't be overlooked!

Click to expand...

Hi, personally I don't think 20 p on a bottle of lucozade, or even if it went higher would do much good? If people want to drink this type of beverage they will do it ( not just for a hypo) and I do think personal responsibility must come into it. With newspapers,magazines, radio, TV, twitter, Facebook, I would think the general public know a lot more about how certain foods affect our bodies and minds than they let on or unfortunately it's head in the sand syndrome.

Bringing back proper cookery lessons in schools so that all teens leave able to make a nutritious meal would help. I'm always shocked by how many people survive on takeaways and prepared food.

I agree with RRB - a tax won't stop people drinking it. Walk around any supermarket and spot how many people load up their trollies with bottles and bottles of cheap soft drinks. They won't care. The drinks will still be cheap and they drink them out of habit.

The situation in Mexico (shown on Jamie Oliver's programme) was shocking (putting coke in a bottle for baby after a breast feed - what?!) but their problem was extreme and it's quite different culturally so there are different reasons for the huge amount of soft drinks consumed.

I think having a sugary drinks tax is a good sound bite but won't have much effect in practice.

TooMuchGlucose said:

Exactly tax on Cigarettes and alcohol is higher than most other goods, another thing that should be done is to stop VAT exemption for all cakes regardless of their sugar content.

Click to expand...

I don't believe the cost of tobacco is the main driver for a decline in the number of smokers. Education is. The warnings on TV and on the actual packaging has probably done the most good as well as the advertising ban. What was once fashionable for everyone to do is now not even cool with the kids! But, it is an addiction and money won't stop addicts getting their fix.

Sure it is clear that education is also necessary but quick results (quicker than cam be accomplished through education alone) can and have been seen by raising orices/adding a tax. For example, the Scottish minimum alcohol unit pricing is not effective through education but financing.

The point is you could drink a small amount and never impact health but it being a cheap option only encourages it. Now take sugary drinks. They are often cheaper than bottled water and like in America some places will offer free refills. The sensible drinker would not be affected. Why not make low sugar alternatives more prevelant and cheaper? If you do not drink diet coke when out you literally have no alternative except water (not everyone likes coke).

It's not like diabetics do not have options. You can get glucotabs, gels, all sorts. I suspect people prefer jelly babies due to taste, but you could have other things equally as effective if you didn't want to pay a sweets tax.

I just struggle to get my head around why people - mostly who get their meds if in the UK for free anyway - don't want to pay 20p more when that would be saving 100s of lives, complications, etc. And even more so the fact that the biggest problem is with those hardest to educate - teenagers! What is a 14yr old going to buy from a shop with £1 if they are thirsty: a sugary drink or a bottle of water?

rachel162 said:

It will do when your blood sugar is low enough, but (for me anyway) when I'm exercising a lot I can't rely on my liver all the time because a) I'll gradually get used to being lower as my body tries to avoid having to dump all its glycogen so my lows get more risky, and b) it takes a day or so for my liver to 'reload', so if I'm low before that sometimes it just won't kick in, or not enough to fix the problem. I tend to go for longer acting carbs beforehand if I can but in an emergency a high sugar liquid is for me a must (much as I hate lucozade ).

Click to expand...

Whole heartedly agreed..
Though, a non D's pancreas would probably "slack" off the insulin production at a certain BS level anyway? As opposed to an insulin dependant who previously administered a calculated "set dose" & the demand during exercise lowering BS quicker..
Interestingly. I find my demand for hypo treatment during "physical exertion" lower as the insulin profile tails off.. I don't eat for instance for about 4 to 5 hours prior to a gig, so no bolus in the mix! During the time of the actuall show. The basal is phasing out.
These gigs can be quite high obtain! \m/
But yep. I always carry a "safety net" in a bottle myself...